266 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26051194)
1. Lack of phonotactic preferences of female frogs and its consequences for signal evolution.
Velásquez NA; Valdés JL; Vásquez RA; Penna M
Behav Processes; 2015 Sep; 118():76-84. PubMed ID: 26051194
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Divergence of acoustic signals in a widely distributed frog: relevance of inter-male interactions.
Velásquez NA; Opazo D; Díaz J; Penna M
PLoS One; 2014; 9(1):e87732. PubMed ID: 24489957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Advertisement-call preferences in diploid-tetraploid treefrogs (Hyla chrysoscelis and Hyla versicolor): implications for mate choice and the evolution of communication systems.
Gerhardt HC
Evolution; 2005 Feb; 59(2):395-408. PubMed ID: 15807424
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Patterns of mating call preferences in túngara frogs, Physalaemus pustulosus.
Ryan MJ; Bernal XE; Rand AS
J Evol Biol; 2007 Nov; 20(6):2235-47. PubMed ID: 17956386
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Sexual selection in female perceptual space: how female túngara frogs perceive and respond to complex population variation in acoustic mating signals.
Ryan MJ; Rand AS
Evolution; 2003 Nov; 57(11):2608-18. PubMed ID: 14686535
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The influence of geographic heterogeneity in predation pressure on sexual signal divergence in an Amazonian frog species complex.
Trillo PA; Athanas KA; Goldhill DH; Hoke KL; Funk WC
J Evol Biol; 2013 Jan; 26(1):216-22. PubMed ID: 23181745
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Aposematic signal variation predicts male-male interactions in a polymorphic poison frog.
Crothers L; Gering E; Cummings M
Evolution; 2011 Feb; 65(2):599-605. PubMed ID: 21271999
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Progesterone and prostaglandin F2α induce species-typical female preferences for male sexual displays in Cope's gray treefrog (Hyla chrysoscelis).
Ward JL; Love EK; Baugh AT; Gordon NM; Tanner JC; Bee MA
Physiol Behav; 2015 Dec; 152(Pt A):280-7. PubMed ID: 26454212
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Modality interactions alter the shape of acoustic mate preference functions in gray treefrogs.
Reichert MS; Höbel G
Evolution; 2015 Sep; 69(9):2384-98. PubMed ID: 26282702
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The mechanism of sound production in túngara frogs and its role in sexual selection and speciation.
Ryan MJ; Guerra MA
Curr Opin Neurobiol; 2014 Oct; 28():54-9. PubMed ID: 25033110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Categorical perception of a natural, multivariate signal: mating call recognition in túngara frogs.
Baugh AT; Akre KL; Ryan MJ
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2008 Jul; 105(26):8985-8. PubMed ID: 18577592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. [Bioacoustic of the advertisement call of Ceratophrys cranwelli (Anura: Ceratophryidae)].
Valetti JA; Salas NE; Martino AL
Rev Biol Trop; 2013 Mar; 61(1):273-80. PubMed ID: 23894980
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The functionality of female reciprocal calls in the Iberian midwife toad (Alytes cisternasii): female-female acoustic competition?
Bosch J
Naturwissenschaften; 2002 Dec; 89(12):575-8. PubMed ID: 12536281
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evolutionary divergence in acoustic signals: causes and consequences.
Wilkins MR; Seddon N; Safran RJ
Trends Ecol Evol; 2013 Mar; 28(3):156-66. PubMed ID: 23141110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The acoustic adaptation hypothesis in a widely distributed South American frog: Southernmost signals propagate better.
Velásquez NA; Moreno-Gómez FN; Brunetti E; Penna M
Sci Rep; 2018 May; 8(1):6990. PubMed ID: 29725055
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Mating vocalizations of female frogs: control and evolutionary mechanisms.
Emerson SB; Boyd SK
Brain Behav Evol; 1999; 53(4):187-97. PubMed ID: 10343085
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Can treefrog phylogeographical clades and species' phylogenetic topologies be recovered by bioacoustical analyses?
Forti LR; Lingnau R; Encarnação LC; Bertoluci J; Toledo LF
PLoS One; 2017; 12(2):e0169911. PubMed ID: 28235089
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Preferences based on spectral differences in acoustic signals in four species of treefrogs (Anura: Hylidae).
Gerhardt HC; Martínez-Rivera CC; Schwartz JJ; Marshall VT; Murphy CG
J Exp Biol; 2007 Sep; 210(Pt 17):2990-8. PubMed ID: 17704074
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Geographic variation in acoustic communication in anurans and its neuroethological implications.
Velásquez NA
J Physiol Paris; 2014; 108(2-3):167-73. PubMed ID: 25446892
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Decoupled Evolution between Senders and Receivers in the Neotropical Allobates femoralis Frog Complex.
Betancourth-Cundar M; Lima AP; Hӧdl W; Amézquita A
PLoS One; 2016; 11(6):e0155929. PubMed ID: 27276054
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
