Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

Fundamental and dominant frequency in bird vocalizations

Authors: Hagemann, Saskia;

Fundamental and dominant frequency in bird vocalizations

Abstract

Vögel produzieren eine große Bandbreite verschiedener Vokalisationen, welche durch die morphologische Vielfalt des Syrinx – dem für Vögel einzigartigen Vokalorgan – und dem Vokaltrakt geformt werden. Die vorliegende Arbeit untersucht die Beziehung zwischen der fundamentalen Frequenz (f0) und der dominanten Frequenz (DF) in Vogelvokalisationen, mit dem Ziel, das Zusammenspiel dieser beiden akustischen Schlüsselparametern zu klären. Obwohl sich f0 und DF oft entsprechen, gibt es in einer Vielzahl an Spezies einen signifikanten unterschied zwischen ihnen, weshalb eine klare Differenzierung von großer Bedeutung ist. Für diese Arbeit wurden zwei Datensätze analysiert: (1) Vokalisationen (Gesang und Rufe) von 100 Passerines Arten und (2) Rufe von 100 Arten, die 20 unterschiedliche Vogelfamilien umspannen. Basierend auf Fourier-Transformation und Autokorrelation wurden f0 und DF extrahiert und über die verschiedenen Arten miteinander verglichen. Zusätzlich dazu wurden die Vokalisationstypen – Gesang und Rufe – innerhalb der Passerines verglichen. Innerhalb der Passerines zeigten Gesang und Rufe ähnliche Werte für f0, unterschieden sich aber signifikant zwischen den DF Werten, was bestätigt, dass f0 und DF unterschiedliche Aspekte der Lauterzeugung reflektieren. Innerhalb des breiter angelegten Datensatzes, war DF bei den meisten Familien signifikant höher als f0. Morphologische Merkmale, wie Körper- und Schnabelgröße wurden ebenfalls einbezogen, um den möglichen Einfluss physischer Komponenten auf die Frequenzparameter zu untersuchen. Darüber hinaus wurde die Auswirkung verwandtschaftlicher Nähe auf die Ausprägung von Unterschieden zwischen den Arten bezüglich der akustischen Parameter miteinbezogen. Die Resultate betonen, dass DF und f0, wenngleich in der Regel eng verknüpft, sie einander nicht entsprechen. Eine klare Unterscheidung dieser beiden Messgrößen ist essentiell für eine akkurate Interpretation akustischer Signale in Vögeln, vor allem in Studien, die vokale Merkmale mit biologischen oder ökologischen Bedingungen in Beziehung setzen wollen.

The production of vocal sound in birds is highly diverse and shaped by the morphological variability of the syrinx, their unique vocal organ, and the vocal tract. This study investigates the relationship between fundamental frequency (f0) and dominant frequency (DF) in bird vocalizations, aiming to clarify the correspondence between these two key acoustic parameters. Although f0 and DF often are the same, they differ in a significant number of species, indicating that they cannot be used interchangeably and should not be conflated. Two datasets were analysed: (1) vocalizations (songs and calls) from 100 Passerines species and (2) calls from 100 species spanning 20 avian families. Using Fourier-based and autocorrelation-based methods, both f0 and DF were extracted and compared across species; in addition, vocalization types (songs vs. calls) were compared within Passerines. In Passerines, songs and calls exhibited similar mean f0 values, while DF differed significantly, confirming that f0 and DF reflect distinct aspects of vocal production. In the broader avian dataset, DF was significantly higher than f0 across most families, although overlap between the two measures varied by taxon. Morphological traits such as body mass and beak size were included to explore potential physical influences on frequency parameters. Additionally, the influence of phylogenetic relatedness on acoustic parameters was considered. The findings highlight that DF and f0, while often related, are not interchangeable measures. A clear distinction between these parameters is essential for accurately interpreting the acoustic signals of birds, particularly in studies linking vocal traits to biological or ecological functions.

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!