Does Gray Squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis) Response to Heterospecific Alarm Calls Depend on Familiarity or Acoustic Similarity?

In habitats in which multiple species are prey to the same predators, individuals can greatly benefit from recognizing information regarding predators that is provided by other species. Past studies have demonstrated that various mammals respond to familiar heterospecific alarm calls, but whether acoustic similarity to a familiar call can prompt a mammal's recognition of an unfamiliar call has yet to be shown. We presented alarm calls to free‐ranging eastern gray squirrels (Sciurus carolinensis) and recorded behavioral changes in vigilance and antipredatory response. Playbacks included alarm calls of a sympatric bird (American robin, Turdus migratorius), an allopatric bird with a call structure similar to that of the robin (common blackbird, Turdus merula), and an allopatric bird with a distinct call structure (New Holland honeyeater, Phylidonyris novaehollandiae). Squirrels responded significantly more frequently to squirrel alarm calls (positive control) than to robin song (negative control) or honeyeater calls. Squirrel response to robin and blackbird alarm calls was statistically similar to their response to squirrel alarm calls, indicating that squirrels responded to those alarm calls as if they provided information about the presence of predators. However, squirrel response to robin song was not statistically different from response to any of the other avian calls, including the robin and blackbird alarms, suggesting that squirrels neither respond to blackbird alarms as if they clearly signify danger, nor as if they clearly do not signify danger, perhaps reflecting some ambiguity in interpretation of the calls. These results suggest that squirrel responses to alarm calls are generally based on call familiarity, but that acoustic similarity of an unfamiliar allopatric call to a familiar call also can elicit antipredator behavior. The lack of response to honeyeater alarm calls also supports the hypothesis that call recognition by gray squirrels is dependent on familiarity, rather than simply detection of an acoustic feature common to alarm calls across a variety of avian species.     

Functionally Referential Alarm Calls in Tamarins (Saguinus fuscicollis and Saguinus mystax) – Evidence from Playback Experiments

Studies on primate vocalisation have revealed different types of alarm call systems ranging from graded signals based on response urgency to functionally referential alarm calls that elicit predator‐specific reactions. In addition, alarm call systems that include both highly specific and other more unspecific calls have been reported. There has been consistent discussion on the possible factors leading to the evolution of different alarm call systems, among which is the need of qualitatively different escape strategies. We studied the alarm calls of free‐ranging saddleback and moustached tamarins (Saguinus fuscicollis and Saguinus mystax) in northeast Peru. Both species have predator‐specific alarm calls and show specific non‐vocal reactions. In response to aerial predators, they look upwards and quickly move downwards, while in response to terrestrial predators, they look downwards and sometimes approach the predator. We conducted playback experiments to test if the predator‐specific reactions could be elicited in the absence of the predator by the tamarins’ alarm calls alone. We found that in response to aerial alarm call playbacks the subjects looked significantly longer upwards, and in response to terrestrial alarm call playbacks they looked significantly longer downwards. Thus, the tamarins reacted as if external referents, i.e. information about the predator type or the appropriate reaction, were encoded in the acoustic features of the calls. In addition, we found no differences in the responses of S. fuscicollis and S. mystax whether the alarm call stimulus was produced by a conspecific or a heterospecific caller. Furthermore, it seems that S. fuscicollis terrestrial alarm calls were less specific than either S. mystax terrestrial predator alarms or either species’ aerial predator alarms, but because of the small sample size it is difficult to draw a final conclusion.     

Crying wolf to a predator: deceptive vocal mimicry by a bird protecting young

Animals often mimic dangerous or toxic species to deter predators; however, mimicry of such species may not always be possible and mimicry of benign species seems unlikely to confer anti-predator benefits. We reveal a system in which a bird mimics the alarm calls of harmless species to fool a predator 40 times its size and protect its offspring against attack. Our experiments revealed that brown thornbills (Acanthiza pusilla) mimic a chorus of other species'' aerial alarm calls, a cue of an Accipiter hawk in flight, when predators attack their nest. The absence of any flying predators in this context implies that these alarms convey deceptive information about the type of danger present. Experiments on the primary nest predators of thornbills, pied currawongs (Strepera graculina), revealed that the predators treat these alarms as if they themselves are threatened by flying hawks, either by scanning the sky for danger or fleeing, confirming a deceptive function. In turn, these distractions delay attack and provide thornbill nestlings with an opportunity to escape. This sophisticated defence strategy exploits the complex web of interactions among multiple species across several trophic levels, and in particular exploits a predator''s ability to eavesdrop on and respond appropriately to heterospecific alarm calls. Our findings demonstrate that prey can fool predators by deceptively mimicking alarm calls of harmless species, suggesting that defensive mimicry could be more widespread because of indirect effects on predators within a web of eavesdropping.     

A mutual understanding? Interspecific responses by birds to each other's aerial alarm calls

Individuals are likely to benefit from responding to the alarmsignals of other species with similar predators, and mutualinterspecific responses to aerial (hawk) alarms are thoughtto be common in birds, in part because similarity in alarm callstructure among species might facilitate detection or interpretation.However, there has been no test of whether interspecific responsesto aerial alarm calls can involve mutual responses between speciesand only incomplete tests of the response of any species tosuch heterospecific alarms. We describe the aerial alarm callsof white-browed scrubwrens (Sericornis frontalis) and superbfairy-wrens (Malurus cyaneus) and use a playback experimentto test for mutual responses to each other's aerial alarm calls.The 2 species occur in similar habitats and can co-occur inmixed-species flocks during the nonbreeding season. The aerialalarm calls of both species are high pitched (7 kHz) and rapidlyfrequency-modulated calls but are distinct in frequency measuresand only the scrubwren's call had 2 parallel sounds. Both speciesfled to cover after playback of either their own or the otherspecies' alarm calls but never to control sounds. The responseto either species' alarm was almost invariant in both speciesin an experiment at high natural amplitude, but there was aslightly lower response to heterospecific compared with conspecificalarms when playbacks were at the mean natural amplitude. Ourresults demonstrate, after at least 50 years of interest inthe subject, that there can be mutual responses to aerial alarmcalls between species.     

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.     

Alarm calls elicit predator-specific physiological responses

Glucocorticoids regulate glucose concentrations and responses to unpredictable events, while also modulating cognition. Juvenile Belding''s ground squirrels (Urocitellus beldingi) learn to respond to whistle and trill alarm calls, warning of aerial and terrestrial predators, respectively, shortly after emerging from natal burrows at one month of age. Alarm calls can cause physiological reactions and arousal, and this arousal, coupled with watching adult responses, might help juveniles learn associations between calls and behavioural responses. I studied whether young show differential cortisol responses to alarm and non-alarm calls, using playbacks of U. beldingi whistles, trills, squeals (a conspecific control vocalization) and silent controls. Trills elicited very high cortisol responses, and, using an individual''s response to the silent control as baseline, only their response to a trill was significantly higher than baseline. This cortisol increase would provide glucose for extended vigilance and escape efforts, which is appropriate for evading terrestrial predators which hunt for long periods. Although whistles do not elicit a cortisol response, previous research has shown that they do result in bradycardia, which enhances attention and information processing. This is a novel demonstration of two physiological responses to two alarm calls, each appropriate to the threats represented by the calls.     

Variation in the Meaning of Alarm Calls in Verreaux’s and Coquerel’s Sifakas (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Propithecus verreauxi,P. coquereli</Emphasis>)

The comprehension and usage of primate alarm calls appear to be influenced by social learning. Thus, alarm calls provide flexible behavioral mechanisms that may allow animals to develop appropriate responses to locally present predators. To study this potential flexibility, we compared the usage and function of 3 alarm calls common to 2 closely related sifaka species (Propithecus verreauxi and P. coquereli), in each of 2 different populations with different sets of predators. Playback studies revealed that both species in both of their respective populations emitted roaring barks in response to raptors, and playbacks of this call elicited a specific anti-raptor response (look up and climb down). However, in Verreaux’s sifakas, tchi-faks elicited anti-terrestrial predator responses (look down, climb up) in the population with a higher potential predation threat by terrestrial predators, whereas tchi-faks in the other population were associated with nonspecific flight responses. In both populations of Coquerel’s sifakas, tchi-fak playbacks elicited anti-terrestrial predator responses. More strikingly, Verreaux’s sifakas exhibited anti-terrestrial predator responses after playbacks of growls in the population with a higher threat of predation by terrestrial predators, whereas Coquerel’s sifakas in the raptor-dominated habitat seemed to associate growls with a threat by raptors; the 2 other populations of each species associated a mild disturbance with growls. We interpret this differential comprehension and usage of alarm calls as the result of social learning processes that caused changes in signal content in response to changes in the set of predators to which these populations have been exposed since they last shared a common ancestor.     

The information that receivers extract from alarm calls in suricates.

Field observations and acoustic analyses have shown that suricate (Suricata suricatta) alarm calls vary in their acoustic structure depending on predator type. In this study, we tested whether receivers respond appropriately when hearing a call in the absence of a predator. Although the only way for suricates to escape from predators is to retreat to boltholes, responses to playbacks could be divided into distinct categories. The subjects responded differently to alarm calls given in response to aerial or terrestrial predators and to recruitment calls emitted in response to snakes and deposits on the ground. Suricates also showed rather distinct responses to low, medium and high urgency aerial calls. Differences in the responses were less obvious for different levels of urgency in the terrestrial and recruitment calls. Suricate receivers thus gain information about both the predator type and level of urgency from the acoustic structures of their calls.     

False alarms and information transmission in grouping animals

A key benefit of grouping in prey species is access to social information, including information about the presence of predators. Larger groups of prey animals respond both sooner and at greater distances from predators, increasing the likelihood that group members will successfully avoid capture. However, identifying predators in complex environments is a difficult task, and false alarms (alarm behaviours without genuine threat) appear surprisingly frequent across a range of taxa including insects, amphibians, fish, mammals, and birds. In some bird flocks, false alarms have been recorded to substantially outnumber true alarms. False alarms can be costly in terms of both the energetic costs of producing alarm behaviours as well as lost opportunity costs (e.g. abandoning a feeding patch which was in fact safe, losing sleep if an animal is resting/roosting, or losing mating opportunities). Models have shown that false alarms may be a substantial but underappreciated cost of group living, introducing an inherent risk to using social information and a vulnerability to the propagation of false information. This review will focus on false alarms, introducing a two-stage framework to categorise the different factors hypothesised to influence the propensity of animal groups to produce false alarms. A number of factors may affect false alarm rate, and this new framework splits these factors into two core processing stages: (i) individual perception and response; and (ii) group processing of predator information. In the first stage, individuals in the group monitor the environment for predator cues and respond. The factors highlighted in this stage influence the likelihood that an individual will misclassify stimuli and produce a false alarm (e.g. lower light levels can make predator identification more difficult and false alarms more common). In the second stage, alarm information from individuals is processed by the group. The factors highlighted in this stage influence the likelihood of alarm information being copied by group members and propagated through the group (e.g. some animals implement group processing mechanisms that regulate the spread of behavioural responses such as consensus decision making through the quorum response). This review follows the structure of this new framework, focussing on the causes of false alarms, factors that influence false alarm rate, the transmission of alarm information through animal groups, mechanisms to mitigate the spread of false alarms, and the consequences of false alarms.     

Experimental study of alarm calls of the oriental tit (Parus minor) toward different predators and reactions they induce in nestlings

Anti-predatory strategies of birds are diverse and may include predator-specific alarm calls. For example, oriental tit (Parus minor) parents can distinguish snakes from other predators and produce snake-specific referential vocalizations ("jar" call) when a snake poses a threat to their nest. The “jar” call has a very specific function to induce fledging of nestlings close to fledging age. This reaction ensures nestlings' survival in natural encounters with snakes that are capable of entering nest cavities and kill entire broods. Sciurid rodents, like chipmunks, may pose a similar threat to cavity-nesting birds. We explored the hypothesis that parents use the fledging-inducing alarm vocalizations in this situation, because chipmunks, like snakes, can kill the brood upon entering the nest cavity. We compared alarm calls of parents toward two predators (chipmunk and snake) who pose a similar threat to the nestlings in a nest cavity, and toward an avian predator (Eurasian jay) who cannot enter nest cavities and poses no threat to the nestlings in a nest. Our results show that the vocal responses of oriental tits were different among the three predators. This suggests that the acoustic properties of vocal responses to predators are different between predators of a similar hunting strategy (nest-cavity entering). The playback of recorded vocal responses of parents to chipmunks did not trigger the fledging of old nestlings, whereas the vocalizations toward a snake did, as shown by earlier studies. Our study suggests that the vocal response of parents does not carry information about the ability of predators to enter the nest cavity and confirms the special status of alarm calls triggered by snakes.     

Perceptual specificity in the alarm calls of Gunnison's prairie dogs

Gunnison's prairie dogs have a complex alarm communication system. We show that the escape responses of prairie dogs to naturally occurring live predators differed depending upon the species of predator. We also show that playbacks of alarm calls that were elicited originally by the live predators produced the same escape responses as the live predators themselves. The escape responses fell into two qualitatively different categories: running to the burrow and diving inside for hawks and humans, and standing upright outside the burrow for coyotes and dogs. Within these two categories there were differences in response. For hawks, only the prairie dogs that were in the direct flight path of a stooping red-tailed hawk ran to their burrows and dove inside, while for humans and human alarm call playbacks there was a colony-wide running to the burrows and diving inside. For coyotes and coyote alarm call playbacks there was a colony-wide running to the burrows and standing alert at the burrow rims, while for domestic dogs and playbacks of alarm calls for domestic dogs the prairie dogs assumed an alert posture wherever they were feeding, but did not run to their burrows. These responses to both the live predators and to predator-elicited alarm calls suggest that the alarm calls of Gunnison's prairie dogs contain meaningful referential information about the categories of predators that approach a colony of prairie dogs.     

Interspecific Responses of Ringtailed Lemurs to Playback of Antipredator Alarm Calls Given by Verreaux's Sifakas

The ringtailed lemur, Lemur catta, and Verreaux's sifaka, Propithecus verreauxi verreauxi, are diurnal prosimians living sympatrically in Madagascar. Species-specific alarm calls emitted by each of these two species in response to aerial and terrestrial predators differ acoustically. Behavioural responses of ringtailed lemurs evoked by playbacks of conspecific alarm calls differ when the vocalizations were produced in response to aerial predators as opposed to terrestrial predators. We conducted playback experiments on two populations of ringtailed lemurs, using two types of sifaka alarm calls. One population consisted of free-ranging groups which lived sympatrically with sifakas, the other was a colony group which had no contact with sifakas. The results illustrate that the former group of lemurs can perceive what type of predators the sifaka calls refer to, whereas the latter group was not able to recognize the difference in the calls.     

Monkeys crying wolf? Tufted capuchin monkeys use anti-predator calls to usurp resources from conspecifics

The use of ‘tactical deception’ is argued to have been important in the cognitive evolution of the order Primates, but systematic studies of active deception in wild non-human primates are scant. This study tests whether wild tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella nigritus) use alarm calls in a functionally deceptive manner to usurp food resources. If capuchins use alarm calls ‘deceptively’, it was predicted that false alarms should be: (i) given by subordinates more than by dominants, (ii) more frequent when food is most contestable, (iii) more frequent when less food is available, and (iv) given when the caller is in a spatial position in which it could increase its feeding success if conspecifics react to the call. These predictions were tested by observing subjects in experimental contexts, in which the amount and distribution of a high-value resource (banana pieces) were manipulated using wooden platforms suspended from tree branches. While false alarms were non-significantly more common when more food was available, the three remaining predictions were supported. These results generally support the hypothesis that alarm calls are used by capuchins to reduce the effects of feeding competition. Whether this is intentional on the part of the caller requires further investigation.     

Interspecific Semantic Alarm Call Recognition in the Solitary Sahamalaza Sportive Lemur,Lepilemur sahamalazensis

As alarm calls indicate the presence of predators, the correct interpretation of alarm calls, including those of other species, is essential for predator avoidance. Conversely, communication calls of other species might indicate the perceived absence of a predator and hence allow a reduction in vigilance. This “eavesdropping” was demonstrated in birds and mammals, including lemur species. Interspecific communication between taxonomic groups has so far been reported in some reptiles and mammals, including three primate species. So far, neither semantic nor interspecific communication has been tested in a solitary and nocturnal lemur species. The aim of this study was to investigate if the nocturnal and solitary Sahamalaza sportive lemur, Lepilemur sahamalazensis, is able to access semantic information of sympatric species. During the day, this species faces the risk of falling prey to aerial and terrestrial predators and therefore shows high levels of vigilance. We presented alarm calls of the crested coua, the Madagascar magpie-robin and aerial, terrestrial and agitation alarm calls of the blue-eyed black lemur to 19 individual Sahamalaza sportive lemurs resting in tree holes. Songs of both bird species’ and contact calls of the blue-eyed black lemur were used as a control. After alarm calls of crested coua, Madagascar magpie-robin and aerial alarm of the blue-eyed black lemur, the lemurs scanned up and their vigilance increased significantly. After presentation of terrestrial alarm and agitation calls of the blue-eyed black lemur, the animals did not show significant changes in scanning direction or in the duration of vigilance. Sportive lemur vigilance decreased after playbacks of songs of the bird species and contact calls of blue-eyed black lemurs. Our results indicate that the Sahamalaza sportive lemur is capable of using information on predator presence as well as predator type of different sympatric species, using their referential signals to detect predators early, and that the lemurs’ reactions are based on experience and learning.     

Eavesdropping on heterospecific alarm calls: from mechanisms to consequences

Animals often gather information from other species by eavesdropping on signals intended for others. We review the extent, benefits, mechanisms, and ecological and evolutionary consequences of eavesdropping on other species' alarm calls. Eavesdropping has been shown experimentally in about 70 vertebrate species, and can entail closely or distantly related species. The benefits of eavesdropping include prompting immediate anti‐predator responses, indirect enhancement of foraging or changed habitat use, and learning about predators. Eavesdropping on heterospecifics can provide more eyes looking for danger, complementary information to that from conspecifics, and potentially information at reduced cost. The response to heterospecific calls can be unlearned or learned. Unlearned responses occur when heterospecific calls have acoustic features similar to that used to recognize conspecific calls, or acoustic properties such as harsh sounds that prompt attention and may allow recognition or facilitate learning. Learning to recognize heterospecific alarm calls is probably essential to allow recognition of the diversity of alarm calls, but the evidence is largely indirect. The value of eavesdropping on different species is affected by problems of signal interception and the relevance of heterospecific alarm calls to the listener. These constraints on eavesdropping will affect how information flows among species and thus affect community function. Some species are ‘keystone’ information producers, while others largely seek information, and these differences probably affect the formation and function of mixed‐species groups. Eavesdroppers might also integrate alarm calls from multiple species to extract relevant and reliable information. Eavesdropping appears to set the stage for the evolution of interspecific deception and communication, and potentially affects communication within species. Overall, we now know that eavesdropping on heterospecific alarm calls is an important source of information for many species across the globe, and there are ample opportunities for research on mechanisms, fitness consequences and implications for community function and signalling evolution.     

The Sound of Danger: Threat Sensitivity to Predator Vocalizations,Alarm Calls,and Novelty in Gulls

The threat sensitivity hypothesis predicts that organisms will evaluate the relative danger of and respond differentially to varying degrees of predation threat. Doing so allows potential prey to balance the costs and benefits of anti-predator behaviors. Threat sensitivity has undergone limited testing in the auditory modality, and the relative threat level of auditory cues from different sources is difficult to infer across populations when variables such as background risk and experience are not properly controlled. We experimentally exposed a single population of two sympatric gull species to auditory stimuli representing a range of potential threats in order to compare the relative threat of heterospecific alarm calls, conspecific alarms calls, predator vocalizations, and novel auditory cues. Gulls were able to discriminate among a diverse set of threat indicators and respond in a graded manner commensurate with the level of threat. Vocalizations of two potential predators, the human voice and bald eagle call, differed in their threat level compared to each other and to alarm calls. Conspecific alarm calls were more threatening than heterospecfic alarm calls to the larger great black-backed gull, but the smaller herring gull weighed both equally. A novel cue elicited a response intermediate between known threats and a known non-threat in herring gulls, but not great black-backed gulls. Our results show that the relative threat level of auditory cues from different sources is highly species-dependent, and that caution should be exercised when comparing graded and threshold threat sensitive responses.     

Age Differences in the Response of Willow Tits (Parus montanus) to Conspecific Alarm Calls

Predation is an important mortality factor in wintering birds. To counter this, birds produce alarm calls in the presence of predators which serve to warn conspecifics. In social hierarchical bird flocks, adults survive the winter better than juveniles and therefore survival strategies probably vary with social status. This study examined the differential responses to alarm calls by free-living willow tits, Parus montanus, in dominance-structured winter flocks in Finland. To explore the age-dependent differences in response to conspecific alarm calls, a series with three alarm calls was played to focal adults and juveniles while they sat in the middle section of a spruce branch. Immediately after the playback, juvenile willow tits moved more often, flew longer distances and changed branches more often than did adults. Previous mammal studies have shown that juveniles are more likely to flee than adults after hearing conspecific alarm calls. The current study demonstrates that similar age-dependent responses to conspecific alarm calls occur in birds also. These findings reflect an increased vulnerability to predators or lack of experience of young birds.     

Adaptive differences in response to two types of parental alarm call in altricial nestlings

Vertebrate alarm calls can contain information about the type of predator and the degree of danger, but young animals often respond to alarm calls differently from adults. The distinct behaviour of young may reflect an imperfect stage in the gradual development of the adult response, or a response adapted to specific risks faced by young. In this study, we tested whether nestling white-browed scrubwrens, Sericornis frontalis, responded to different alarm calls according to their specific risks of predation. As predators on the ground pose a danger to scrubwren nestlings, whereas flying predators do not, we predicted that they would respond to ground alarm calls but not to aerial alarm calls. In a field playback experiment, we tested the response of young to aerial and ground alarm calls, each presented in a shorter (less urgent) and longer (more urgent) form. We found that both 5- and 11-day-old nestlings responded to ground alarm calls, and did so more strongly to the more urgent playback. By contrast, the response to aerial alarm calls started to develop only towards the end of the nestling stage. Thus, scrubwren nestlings can distinguish between different types of alarm calls and react more strongly to calls warning of a predator posing greater danger, appropriate to the nestling stage of development. Furthermore, they use the length of ground alarm calls as an indicator of the degree of danger.     

Hornbills can distinguish between primate alarm calls

Some mammals distinguish between and respond appropriately to the alarm calls of other mammal and bird species. However, the ability of birds to distinguish between mammal alarm calls has not been investigated. Diana monkeys (Cercopithecus diana) produce different alarm calls to two predators: crowned eagles (Stephanoaetus coronatus) and leopards (Panthera pardus). Yellow-casqued hornbills (Ceratogymna elata) are vulnerable to predation by crowned eagles but are not preyed on by leopards and might therefore be expected to respond to the Diana monkey eagle alarm call but not to the leopard alarm call. We compared responses of hornbills to playback of eagle shrieks, leopard growls, Diana monkey eagle alarm calls and Diana monkey leopard alarm calls and found that they distinguished appropriately between the two predator vocalizations as well as between the two Diana monkey alarm calls. We discuss possible mechanisms leading to these responses.     

Learning fine-tunes a specific response of nestlings to the parental alarm calls of their own species

Parent birds often give alarm calls when a predator approaches their nest. However, it is not clear whether these alarms function to warn nestlings, nor is it known whether nestling responses are species-specific. The parental alarms of reed warblers, Acrocephalus scirpaceus ("churr"), dunnocks, Prunella modularis ("tseep"), and robins, Erithacus rubecula ("seee") are very different. Playback experiments revealed that nestlings of all three species ceased begging only in response to conspecific alarm calls. These differences between species in response are not simply a product of differences in raising environment, because when newly hatched dunnocks and robins were cross-fostered to nests of the other two species, they did not develop a response to their foster species' alarms. Instead, they still responded specifically to their own species' alarms. However, their response was less strong than that of nestlings raised normally by their own species. We suggest that, as in song development, a neural template enables nestlings to recognize features of their own species' signals from a background of irrelevant sounds, but learning then fine-tunes the response to reduce recognition errors.