These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

137 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26920078)

  • 1. Receiver discriminability drives the evolution of complex sexual signals by sexual selection.
    Cui J; Song X; Zhu B; Fang G; Tang Y; Ryan MJ
    Evolution; 2016 Apr; 70(4):922-7. PubMed ID: 26920078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Male vocal competition is dynamic and strongly affected by social contexts in music frogs.
    Fang G; Jiang F; Yang P; Cui J; Brauth SE; Tang Y
    Anim Cogn; 2014 Mar; 17(2):483-94. PubMed ID: 24030652
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The biological significance of acoustic stimuli determines ear preference in the music frog.
    Xue F; Fang G; Yang P; Zhao E; Brauth SE; Tang Y
    J Exp Biol; 2015 Mar; 218(Pt 5):740-7. PubMed ID: 25740903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The First Call Note Plays a Crucial Role in Frog Vocal Communication.
    Yue X; Fan Y; Xue F; Brauth SE; Tang Y; Fang G
    Sci Rep; 2017 Aug; 7(1):10128. PubMed ID: 28860503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Real estate ads in Emei music frog vocalizations: female preference for calls emanating from burrows.
    Cui J; Tang Y; Narins PM
    Biol Lett; 2012 Jun; 8(3):337-40. PubMed ID: 22158736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Auditory neural networks involved in attention modulation prefer biologically significant sounds and exhibit sexual dimorphism in anurans.
    Xue F; Yue X; Fan Y; Cui J; Brauth SE; Tang Y; Fang G
    J Exp Biol; 2018 Mar; 221(Pt 5):. PubMed ID: 29361582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Sexual selection for sensory exploitation in the frog Physalaemus pustulosus.
    Ryan MJ; Fox JH; Wilczynski W; Rand AS
    Nature; 1990 Jan; 343(6253):66-7. PubMed ID: 2296291
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Female discrimination thresholds frequently exceed local male display variation: implications for mate choice dynamics and sexual selection.
    Höbel G
    J Evol Biol; 2016 Mar; 29(3):572-82. PubMed ID: 26663413
    [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. Arginine vasotocin injection increases probability of calling in cricket frogs, but causes call changes characteristic of less aggressive males.
    Marler CA; Chu J; Wilczynski W
    Horm Behav; 1995 Dec; 29(4):554-70. PubMed ID: 8748513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Complexity increases working memory for mating signals.
    Akre KL; Ryan MJ
    Curr Biol; 2010 Mar; 20(6):502-5. PubMed ID: 20206525
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Animal communication: complex call production in the túngara frog.
    Gridi-Papp M; Rand AS; Ryan MJ
    Nature; 2006 May; 441(7089):38. PubMed ID: 16672962
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The Lombard effect in male ultrasonic frogs: Regulating antiphonal signal frequency and amplitude in noise.
    Shen JX; Xu ZM
    Sci Rep; 2016 Jun; 6():27103. PubMed ID: 27345957
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Do frog-eating bats perceptually bind the complex components of frog calls?
    Jones PL; Farris HE; Ryan MJ; Page RA
    J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol; 2013 Apr; 199(4):279-83. PubMed ID: 23322446
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Multimodal communication in a noisy environment: a case study of the Bornean rock frog Staurois parvus.
    Grafe TU; Preininger D; Sztatecsny M; Kasah R; Dehling JM; Proksch S; Hödl W
    PLoS One; 2012; 7(5):e37965. PubMed ID: 22655089
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Sex differences in vocalization are reflected by event-related potential components in the music frog.
    Shen D; Fang K; Fan Y; Shen J; Yang J; Cui J; Tang Y; Fang G
    Anim Cogn; 2020 May; 23(3):477-490. PubMed ID: 32016618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Relative comparisons of call parameters enable auditory grouping in frogs.
    Farris HE; Ryan MJ
    Nat Commun; 2011 Aug; 2():410. PubMed ID: 21811239
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Auditory sensitivity exhibits sexual dimorphism and seasonal plasticity in music frogs.
    Yang P; Xue F; Cui J; Brauth SE; Tang Y; Fang G
    J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol; 2018 Dec; 204(12):1029-1044. PubMed ID: 30377768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.