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 *

232 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28935936)

  • 21. Are frog calls relatively difficult to locate by mammalian predators?
    Jones DL; Ratnam R
    J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol; 2023 Jan; 209(1):11-30. PubMed ID: 36508005
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Vocalizations of female frogs contain nonlinear characteristics and individual signatures.
    Zhang F; Zhao J; Feng AS
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(3):e0174815. PubMed ID: 28358859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Behind the mask(ing): how frogs cope with noise.
    Lee N; Vélez A; Bee M
    J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol; 2023 Jan; 209(1):47-66. PubMed ID: 36310303
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Call patterns and basilar papilla tuning in cricket frogs. I. Differences among populations and between sexes.
    Wilczynski W; Keddy-Hector AC; Ryan MJ
    Brain Behav Evol; 1992; 39(4):229-37. PubMed ID: 1633554
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Effects of traffic noise on the calling behavior of two Neotropical hylid frogs.
    Caorsi VZ; Both C; Cechin S; Antunes R; Borges-Martins M
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(8):e0183342. PubMed ID: 28854253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Female preferences for the spectral content of advertisement calls in Cope's gray treefrog (Hyla chrysoscelis).
    Gupta S; Bee MA
    J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol; 2023 Jan; 209(1):31-45. PubMed ID: 36305902
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Evolutionary adaptations for the temporal processing of natural sounds by the anuran peripheral auditory system.
    Schrode KM; Bee MA
    J Exp Biol; 2015 Mar; 218(Pt 6):837-48. PubMed ID: 25617467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Neotropical frogs and mating songs: The evolution of advertisement calls in glassfrogs.
    Escalona Sulbarán MD; Ivo Simões P; Gonzalez-Voyer A; Castroviejo-Fisher S
    J Evol Biol; 2019 Feb; 32(2):163-176. PubMed ID: 30481406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Correlations between call characteristics and morphology in male cricket frogs (Acris crepitans).
    McClelland BE; Wilczynski W; Ryan MJ
    J Exp Biol; 1996 Sep; 199(Pt 9):1907-19. PubMed ID: 8831143
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. From uni- to multimodality: towards an integrative view on anuran communication.
    Starnberger I; Preininger D; Hödl W
    J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol; 2014 Sep; 200(9):777-87. PubMed ID: 24973893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Acoustic characteristics of eight common Chinese anurans during the breeding season.
    Zhou YL; Qiu X; Fang XB; Yang LY; Zhao Y; Fang T; Zheng WH; Liu JS
    Dongwuxue Yanjiu; 2014 Jan; 35(1):42-50. PubMed ID: 24470453
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Peripheral Auditory System Divergence Does Not Explain Species Differences in Call Preference.
    Hoke KL; Christensen-Dalsgaard J; Womack MC
    Brain Behav Evol; 2022; 97(3-4):151-166. PubMed ID: 35152212
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Whispering to the deaf: communication by a frog without external vocal sac or tympanum in noisy environments.
    Boistel R; Aubin T; Cloetens P; Langer M; Gillet B; Josset P; Pollet N; Herrel A
    PLoS One; 2011; 6(7):e22080. PubMed ID: 21779377
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Evolution of acoustic signals associated with cooperative parental behavior in a poison frog.
    Moss JB; Tumulty JP; Fischer EK
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2023 Apr; 120(17):e2218956120. PubMed ID: 37071680
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The use of bioacoustics in anuran taxonomy: theory, terminology, methods and recommendations for best practice.
    Köhler J; Jansen M; Rodríguez A; Kok PJR; Toledo LF; Emmrich M; Glaw F; Haddad CFB; Rödel MO; Vences M
    Zootaxa; 2017 Apr; 4251(1):1-124. PubMed ID: 28609991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Environmental and phylogenetic aspects affect in different ways the acoustic niche of a frog community in southeastern Brazil.
    Manzano MCR; Sawaya RJ
    An Acad Bras Cienc; 2022; 94(1):e20200705. PubMed ID: 35019001
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. How the environment shapes animal signals: a test of the acoustic adaptation hypothesis in frogs.
    Goutte S; Dubois A; Howard SD; Márquez R; Rowley JJL; Dehling JM; Grandcolas P; Xiong RC; Legendre F
    J Evol Biol; 2018 Jan; 31(1):148-158. PubMed ID: 29150984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Acoustic radiation patterns of mating calls of the tungara frog (Physalaemus pustuosus): implications for multiple receivers.
    Bernal XE; Page RA; Ryan MJ; Argo TF; Wilson PS
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 Nov; 126(5):2757-67. PubMed ID: 19894851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Neglecting the call of the wild: Captive frogs like the sound of their own voice.
    Passos LF; Garcia G; Young RJ
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(7):e0181931. PubMed ID: 28732034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Acoustic interference and recognition space within a complex assemblage of dendrobatid frogs.
    Amézquita A; Flechas SV; Lima AP; Gasser H; Hödl W
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2011 Oct; 108(41):17058-63. PubMed ID: 21969562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.