Functional and Evolutionary Relationships of Vocal Copying Phenomena in Birds

Vocal copying (vocal imitation, vocal mimicry, and vocal convergence) in birds is reviewed and synthesized by placing these phenomena in a functional and evolutionary framework. Confusion surrounding avian vocal copying has resulted from vague and inconsistently applied terminology, virtually no experimental field work, and a failure to consider vocal copying in an evolutionary perspective. Four categories of vocal copying are recognized herein: vocal appropriation, vocal imitation, vocal mimicry, and vocal convergence or nondivergence. Vocal mimicry, a vocalization that serves to deceive a signalreceiver, is the rarest of the four categories and has not been verified experimentally.     

Avian vocal mimicry: a unified conceptual framework

Mimicry is a classical example of adaptive signal design. Here, we review the current state of research into vocal mimicry in birds. Avian vocal mimicry is a conspicuous and often spectacular form of animal communication, occurring in many distantly related species. However, the proximate and ultimate causes of vocal mimicry are poorly understood. In the first part of this review, we argue that progress has been impeded by conceptual confusion over what constitutes vocal mimicry. We propose a modified version of Vane‐Wright's (1980) widely used definition of mimicry. According to our definition, a vocalisation is mimetic if the behaviour of the receiver changes after perceiving the acoustic resemblance between the mimic and the model, and the behavioural change confers a selective advantage on the mimic. Mimicry is therefore specifically a functional concept where the resemblance between heterospecific sounds is a target of selection. It is distinct from other forms of vocal resemblance including those that are the result of chance or common ancestry, and those that have emerged as a by‐product of other processes such as ecological convergence and selection for large song‐type repertoires. Thus, our definition provides a general and functionally coherent framework for determining what constitutes vocal mimicry, and takes account of the diversity of vocalisations that incorporate heterospecific sounds. In the second part we assess and revise hypotheses for the evolution of avian vocal mimicry in the light of our new definition. Most of the current evidence is anecdotal, but the diverse contexts and acoustic structures of putative vocal mimicry suggest that mimicry has multiple functions across and within species. There is strong experimental evidence that vocal mimicry can be deceptive, and can facilitate parasitic interactions. There is also increasing support for the use of vocal mimicry in predator defence, although the mechanisms are unclear. Less progress has been made in explaining why many birds incorporate heterospecific sounds into their sexual displays, and in determining whether these vocalisations are functionally mimetic or by‐products of sexual selection for other traits such as repertoire size. Overall, this discussion reveals a more central role for vocal mimicry in the behavioural ecology of birds than has previously been appreciated. The final part of this review identifies important areas for future research. Detailed empirical data are needed on individual species, including on the structure of mimetic signals, the contexts in which mimicry is produced, how mimicry is acquired, and the ecological relationships between mimic, model and receiver. At present, there is little information and no consensus about the various costs of vocal mimicry for the protagonists in the mimicry complex. The diversity and complexity of vocal mimicry in birds raises important questions for the study of animal communication and challenges our view of the nature of mimicry itself. Therefore, a better understanding of avian vocal mimicry is essential if we are to account fully for the diversity of animal signals.     

A comparative study of the function of heterospecific vocal mimicry in European passerines

Although heterospecific vocal imitation is well documented inpasserines, the evolutionary correlates of this phenomenon arepoorly known. Here, we studied interspecific variation in vocalmimicry in a comparative study of 241 European songbirds. Wetested whether vocal mimicry is a mode of repertoire acquisitionor whether it resulted from imperfect song learning. We alsoinvestigated the effect of the degree of contact with the vocalenvironment (with species having larger ranges, abundance, orbeing long lived having a higher degree of mimicry) and a possiblelink with cognitive capacity (an overall larger brain in specieswith mimicry). Finally, we determined the potential evolutionaryrole of vocal mimicry in different interspecific contexts, predictingthat mimicry may affect the intensity of brood parasitism, predation,or degree of hybridization. While controlling for research effortand phylogenetic relationships among taxa, we found that effectsizes for intersong interval, brain size, breeding dispersal,abundance, age-dependent expression of repertoires, and predationrisk reached a level that may indicate evolutionary importance.Vocal mimicry seems to be a consequence of song continuity ratherthan song complexity, may partially have some cognitive componentbut may also be dependent on the vocal environment, and mayattract the attention of predators. However, estimates of sexualselection and interspecific contacts due to brood parasitismand hybridization varied independently of vocal mimicry. Therefore,mimicry may have no function in female choice for complex songsand may be weakly selected via interspecific associations. Thesefindings provide little evidence for vocal mimicry having evolvedto serve important functions in most birds.     

Fork-tailed drongos use deceptive mimicked alarm calls to steal food

Despite the prevalence of vocal mimicry in animals, few functions for this behaviour have been shown. I propose a novel hypothesis that false mimicked alarm calls could be used deceptively to scare other species and steal their food. Studies have previously suggested that animals use their own species-specific alarm calls to steal food. However none have shown conclusively that these false alarms are deceptive, or that mimicked alarm calls are used in this manner. Here, I show that wild fork-tailed drongos (Dicrurus adsimilis) make both drongo-specific and mimicked false alarm calls when watching target species handling food, in response to which targets flee to cover abandoning their food. The drongo-specific and mimicked calls made in false alarms were structurally indistinguishable from calls made during true alarms at predators by drongos and other species. Furthermore, I demonstrate by playback experiments that two of these species, meerkats (Suricata suricatta) and pied babblers (Turdoides bicolor), are deceived by both drongo-specific and mimicked false alarm calls. These results provide the first conclusive evidence that false alarm calls are deceptive and demonstrate a novel function for vocal mimicry. This work also provides valuable insight into the benefits of deploying variable mimetic signals in deceptive communication.     

Understanding Mimicry – with Special Reference to Vocal Mimicry

The term mimicry was introduced to biology in 1862 by Henry Walter Bates in his evolutionary explanation of deceptive communication in nature, based on a three‐part interaction system of a mimicked organism or object (called model), a mimicking organism (called mimic), and one or more organisms as selecting agents. Bates gave two incongruous definitions of mimicry: one from the viewpoint of a natural agent that selects for, and in consequence is deceived by, the close resemblance of a toxic model's warning signal and the similar appearance of a palatable mimic, and another one from the viewpoint of a human taxonomist who under an evolutionary aspect focuses on convergent resemblance between model and mimic. Later definitions of Müllerian (F. Müller), arithmetic (A. Wallace) and social (M. Moynihan) mimicry abolish deception in the natural selecting agent, rely on the convergence criterion alone, fuse the roles of model and mimic but have to accept a mix of homologous and convergent resemblance amongst them for a functional explanation. The definition of vocal mimicry (E. Armstrong) refers to a learned resemblance between mimic and heterospecific model by character duplication (no convergence), so far without known (deceived or not deceived) natural selecting agents. It excludes Batesian vocal mimicry. The functional ethological understanding of mimicry as a tripartite communication system (W. Wickler) is consistent with Bates' concept and accepts deception as key element of Batesian mimicry beyond homologous and convergent resemblances. Deception is seen as caused by the divergence between a sign and its meaning for the natural selecting agent. This understanding covers mimicry in all behaviour domains, provides a generally applicable definition of mimic and model so far missing in any mimicry concept, and it distinguishes – still in line with Henry Bates – cultural from genetically determined model‐mimic‐resemblance; this applies to vocal mimicry in particular. Convergently evolved model‐mimic‐resemblance, not essential in Batesian mimicry but mandatory for its alternatives, marks a fundamental distinction between Batesian mimicry (including Mimesis) and all other conceptualized mimicries and accounts for the non‐existence of a unified meaning of the term mimicry. However, character convergence does not help to explain the mere existence of mimicry phenomena and is irrelevant for their permanence in nature. I therefore propose to remove the convergence argument from any mimicry definition.     

Seasonal patterns of vocal mimicry in northern mockingbirds Mimus polyglottos

Many aspects of birdsong vary seasonally, but we know almost nothing about seasonal variation in vocal mimicry, a conspicuous feature of the songs of 15–20% of bird species. I sampled spontaneous song from nine, free‐living, male northern mockingbirds Mimus polyglottos four times during the calendar year – three times during the breeding season, and once during the non‐breeding season. Results showed that mockingbirds did not mimic summer migrants significantly more during any sampling period. Results also showed significant differences across sampling periods in the frequency, but not diversity, of mimicry. Frequency of mimicry was highest in late spring (61.3%) and lowest during the non‐breeding season (48.3%), suggesting mimicry might play a role in reproductive stimulation of multiple‐brooded females. Because mockingbirds mimicked summer migrants throughout the year, regardless of whether migrants were present, mimicry is unlikely to facilitate interspecies communication. Seasonal patterns also suggest that females might be attracted to a high frequency of mimicry, but not to a high diversity of mimicry. I argue that observational studies of seasonal variation in additional mimics could provide key insights into the functional role of vocal mimicry.     

Vocal mimicry by the Black-browed Reed Warbler Acrocephalus bistrigiceps: objective identification of mimetic sounds

Vocal mimicry by the Black-browed Reed Warbler Acrocephalus bistrigiceps was investigated. To identify mimicry objectively, we measured similarities between the sounds of models and those of Warblers by means of Principal Component Analysis (PCA) using a set of acoustic parameters. Of the sounds suspected of being mimicry according to visual inspection of sonagrams, only 57% were identifiable as mimicry according to PCA. Previous studies have not included quantitative criteria for assessing vocal mimicry, and our results suggest that judgements might not be reliable in the absence of objective criteria. Male Warblers incorporated the mimetic sounds into their songs, and each male mimicked 2–5 species. We found no evidence that females preferred males with large mimetic repertoires. This suggests that vocal mimicry has not evolved in response to selection by females in this species, although our analysis did not reveal entire mimetic repertoires in the Warbler songs.     

Vocal mimicry in spotted bowerbirds is associated with an alarming context

Although the presence of vocal mimicry in songbirds is well documented, the function of such impressive copying is poorly understood. One explanation for mimicry in species that predominantly mimic alarm calls and predator vocal isations is that these birds use mimicry to confuse or deter potential threats or intruders, so these vocalisations should therefore be produced when the mimic is alarmed and be uncommon in other contexts. Male bowerbirds construct bowers to display to females and anecdotal reports from the Ptilonorhynchus genus suggest that males mimic alarm sounds when disturbed at their bowers. We quantified and compared the rate of mimicry during disturbance to the bower by a human and in naturally occurring social contexts in a population of spotted bowerbirds Ptilonorhynchus maculatus. Male bowerbirds produced mimicry more than thirty times more frequently in response to bower disturbance than they did in any other context. Neither conspecifics nor heterospecifics were attracted to the bower area by mimicry. These data are consistent with the hypothesis that the production of mimicry is associated with a response to an alarming situation. Additionally, the predominance of alarm mimicry by spotted bowerbirds raises the possibility that the birds learn these sounds when they experience alarming situations and they reproduce them in subsequent alarming situations.     

Vocal Mimicry of Alarm‐Associated Sounds by a Drongo Elicits Flee and Mobbing Responses from Other Species that Participate in Mixed‐Species Bird Flocks

A growing number of studies have shown that vocal mimicry appears to be adaptive for some bird species, although the exact function of this behaviour varies among species. Previous work has looked at the function of the vocal mimicry of non‐alarm sounds by the Greater Racket‐tailed Drongo (Dicurus paradiseus). But drongos also imitate sounds associated with danger, such as predators' vocalisations or the mobbing‐specific vocalisations of other prey species, raising the question of whether the function of mimicry can vary even within a species. In a playback experiment, we compared the effect on other species of different drongo vocalisations including: (1) predator mimicry, (2) mobbing mimicry, (3) drongo species‐specific alarms, (4) drongo species‐specific non‐alarms and (5) a control (barbet) sound. Both mobbing mimicry and drongo species‐specific alarms elicited flee responses from the most numerous species in the flocks, the Orange‐billed Babbler (Turdoides rufescens). Mobbing mimicry also elicited mobbing responses from the Orange‐billed Babbler and from another gregarious babbler, the Ashy‐headed Laughingthrush (Garrulax cinereifrons); when responses from both species were considered together, they were elicited at a significantly higher level by mobbing mimicry than by the barbet control, and a level that tended to be higher (0.07 < p < 0.10) than the response to drongo‐specific alarms. Predator mimicry elicited flee and mobbing responses at an intermediary level. Our results support the hypotheses that mobbing mimicry is a specific category of mimicry that helps attract the aid of heterospecifics during mobbing and that alarm mimicry can in some cases be beneficial to the caller.     

Female preferences drive the evolution of mimetic accuracy in male sexual displays

Males in many bird species mimic the vocalizations of other species during sexual displays, but the evolutionary and functional significance of interspecific vocal mimicry is unclear. Here we use spectrographic cross-correlation to compare mimetic calls produced by male satin bowerbirds (Ptilonorhynchus violaceus) in courtship with calls from several model species. We show that the accuracy of vocal mimicry and the number of model species mimicked are both independently related to male mating success. Multivariate analyses revealed that these mimetic traits were better predictors of male mating success than other male display traits previously shown to be important for male mating success. We suggest that preference-driven mimetic accuracy may be a widespread occurrence, and that mimetic accuracy may provide females with important information about male quality. Our findings support an alternative hypothesis to help explain a common element of male sexual displays.     

Repertoire size,auditory templates,and selective vocal learning in songbirds

When vocal variability, here measured by song repertoire size, increases in songbirds, it may become increasingly difficult to encode genetically all the information which is required to ensure the learning of only conspecific songs. Marsh wrens (Cistothorus palustris) have sizeable song repertoires, and while no vocal mimicry is evident in the field, males will readily learn heterospecific songs in the laboratory. These data, together with data from the literature, support the proposed relationship between increased repertoire sizes and reduced specificity of the innate auditory template which guides vocal learning.     

Imperfect mimicry of host begging calls by a brood parasitic cuckoo: a cue for nestling rejection by hosts?

Coevolutionary interactions between avian brood parasites and their hosts often lead to the evolution of discrimination and rejection of parasite eggs or chicks by hosts based on visual cues, and the evolution of visual mimicry of host eggs or chicks by brood parasites. Hosts may also base rejection of brood parasite nestlings on vocal cues, which would in turn select for mimicry of host begging calls in brood parasite chicks. In cuckoos that exploit multiple hosts with different begging calls, call structure may be plastic, allowing nestlings to modify their calls to match those of their various hosts, or fixed, in which case we would predict either imperfect mimicry or divergence of the species into host-specific lineages. In our study of the little bronze-cuckoo (LBC) Chalcites minutillus and its primary host, the large-billed gerygone Gerygone magnirostris, we tested whether: (1) hosts use nestling vocalizations as a cue to discriminate cuckoo chicks; (2) cuckoo nestlings mimic the host begging calls throughout the nestling period; and (3) the cuckoo begging calls are plastic, thereby facilitating mimicry of the calls of different hosts. We found that the begging calls of LBCs are most similar to their gerygone hosts shortly after hatching (when rejection by hosts typically occurs) but become less similar as cuckoo chicks get older. Begging call structure may be used as a cue for rejection by hosts, and these results are consistent with gerygone defenses selecting for age-specific vocal mimicry in cuckoo chicks. We found no evidence that LBC begging calls were plastic.     

The evolution of learning

Most processes or forms of learning have been treated almost as special creations, each as an independent process unrelated to others. This review offers an evolutionary cladogram linking nearly one hundred forms of learning and showing the paths through which they evolved. Many processes have multiple forms. There are at least five imprinting processes, eleven varieties of Pavlovian conditioning, ten of instrumental conditioning, and eight forms of mimicry and imitation. Song learning evolved independently in at least six groups of animals, and movement imitation in three (great apes, cetaceans and psittacine birds). The cladogram also involves at least eight new processes: abstract concept formation, percussive mimicry, cross-modal imitation, apo-conditioning, hybrid conditioning, proto-pantomime, prosodic mimicry, and image-mediated learning. At least eight of the processes evolved from more than one source. Multiple sources are of course consistent with modern evolutionary theory, as seen in some obligate symbionts, and gene-swapping organisms. Song learning is believed to have evolved from two processes: auditory imprinting and skill learning. Many single words evolved from three sources: vocal mimicry, discrimination learning, and abstract concept formation.     

Killer whales are capable of vocal learning

The production learning of vocalizations by manipulation of the sound production organs to alter the physical structure of sound has been demonstrated in only a few mammals. In this natural experiment, we document the vocal behaviour of two juvenile killer whales, Orcinus orca, separated from their natal pods, which are the only cases of dispersal seen during the three decades of observation of their populations. We find mimicry of California sea lion (Zalophus californianus) barks, demonstrating the vocal production learning ability for one of the calves. We also find differences in call usage (compared to the natal pod) that may reflect the absence of a repertoire model from tutors or some unknown effect related to isolation or context.     

Mimicry as a novel pathway linking biodiversity functions and individual behavioural performances

The feedback of biodiversity on individual trait variation is a poorly explored mechanistic pathway in ecological research. We analysed the relationship between biodiversity and individual performance by focusing on vocal mimicry, a widespread interaction that may serve in intra- and interspecific communication. We studied the songs of two lark species (genus Galerida) that increase the complexity of their song displays by mimicking other birds, and analysed the influence of bird species richness on individual song performance. The diversity of mimicked species and the prevalence of mimicry increased in areas characterized by great α and γ diversity (i.e. where larks experience more diverse encounters with community members, many of them being highly vocal owing to breeding). Conversely, the variability in species-specific song components peaked where larks were abundant, probably matching the complexity of conspecific social milieu. Some trade-offs existed between homo- and heterospecific complexity, suggesting that larks could change from population- to community-driven song variation by tracking the composition of the auditory environment. Mimicry, which serves communication with conspecifics or predators, may mediate interactions, ultimately cascading to aspects of ecological diversity other than those promoting its complexity.     

Mimicry vs. similarity: which resemblances between brood parasites and their hosts are mimetic and which are not?

Mimicry is one of the most conspicuous and puzzling phenomena in nature. The best-known examples come from insects and brood parasitic birds. Unfortunately, the term 'mimicry' is used indiscriminately and inconsistently in the brood parasitic literature despite the obvious fact that similarities of eggs, nestlings and adults of brood parasites to their hosts could result from many different processes (phylogenetic constraint, predation, intraspecific arms-races, vocal imitation, exploitation of pre-existing preferences, etc.). In this note I wish to plead for a more careful use of the term. I review various processes leading to a similarity between propagules (both eggs and nestlings) of brood parasites and their hosts and stress that: (1) mimetic and non-mimetic similarities should be differentiated, (2) a mere similarity of host and parasite propagules provides no evidence for mimicry, (3) mimicry is more usefully understood as a (coevolutionary) process rather than an appearance, and (4) mimicry terminology should reflect the process which led to mimetic similarity. Accepting the mimicry hypothesis requires both the experimental approach and rejection of alternative hypotheses explaining similarities of host and parasite propagules.  © 2005 The Linnean Society of London, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society , 2005, 84 , 69–78.     

DEVELOPMENT OF DISPLAY BEHAVIOR IN YOUNG CAPTIVE BEARDED SEALS

In this study of the ontogeny of vocal behavior in captive bearded seals, Erignathus barbatus , (three males and three females), only males exhibited vocal displays. The onset of display behavior coincided with sexual maturity. Males exhibited three types of dive displays associated with the performance of vocalizations. Vocalizing individuals were frequently attended by another male that maintained passive muzzle contact with the vocalizing male. These interactions were non-aggressive and might play a role in the establishment of a social hierarchy or they might allow the attendee to obtain "near-field" vocal information from the displaying male. Captive males' vocalizations resembled those of males in the wild. However, display dives were shorter, and fewer vocalization types were documented among the captive males compared to bearded seals in the wild. The capacity of the captive males for producing well-formed, long calls with large frequency changes was also significantly less than for wild males. These capacities will likely develop further as the males grow older. Individual capacity for vocal production appears to develop gradually, showing plasticity in form development over time.     

Structural Classification of Wild Boar (Sus scrofa) Vocalizations

Determining whether a species' vocal communication system is graded or discrete requires definition of its vocal repertoire. In this context, research on domestic pig (Sus scrofa domesticus) vocalizations, for example, has led to significant advances in our understanding of communicative functions. Despite their close relation to domestic pigs, little is known about wild boar (Sus scrofa) vocalizations. The few existing studies, conducted in the 1970s, relied on visual inspections of spectrograms to quantify acoustic parameters and lacked statistical analysis. Here, we use objective signal processing techniques and advanced statistical approaches to classify 616 calls recorded from semi‐free ranging animals. Based on four spectral and temporal acoustic parameters—quartile Q25, duration, spectral flux, and spectral flatness—extracted from a multivariate analysis, we refine and extend the conclusions drawn from previous work and present a statistically validated classification of the wild boar vocal repertoire into four call types: grunts, grunt‐squeals, squeals, and trumpets. While the majority of calls could be sorted into these categories using objective criteria, we also found evidence supporting a graded interpretation of some wild boar vocalizations as acoustically continuous, with the extremes representing discrete call types. The use of objective criteria based on modern techniques and statistics in respect to acoustic continuity advances our understanding of vocal variation. Integrating our findings with recent studies on domestic pig vocal behavior and emotions, we emphasize the importance of grunt‐squeals for acoustic approaches to animal welfare and underline the need of further research investigating the role of domestication on animal vocal communication.     

Prey community structure affects how predators select for Mullerian mimicry

Müllerian mimicry describes the close resemblance between aposematic prey species; it is thought to be beneficial because sharing a warning signal decreases the mortality caused by sampling by inexperienced predators learning to avoid the signal. It has been hypothesized that selection for mimicry is strongest in multi-species prey communities where predators are more prone to misidentify the prey than in simple communities. In this study, wild great tits (Parus major) foraged from either simple (few prey appearances) or complex (several prey appearances) artificial prey communities where a specific model prey was always present. Owing to slower learning, the model did suffer higher mortality in complex communities when the birds were inexperienced. However, in a subsequent generalization test to potential mimics of the model prey (a continuum of signal accuracy), only birds that had foraged from simple communities selected against inaccurate mimics. Therefore, accurate mimicry is more likely to evolve in simple communities even though predator avoidance learning is slower in complex communities. For mimicry to evolve, prey species must have a common predator; the effective community consists of the predator's diet. In diverse environments, the limited diets of specialist predators could create 'simple community pockets' where accurate mimicry is selected for.