ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2021
Variation in vocal production learning across songbirds.
Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Genome-wide investigation of prosody perception: Shared genetic influences between speech rhythm, musical rhythm, and reading traits.HGG advances · 2026Article
- A species rules syntax model accurately organizes birdsong syllables into songs.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Cultural and morphological divergence of Darwin's cactus finches (Biological journal of the Linnean Society. Linnean Society of London · 2025Article
- The role of musical pitch in long-distance defensive signaling.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2025Review
- Humans need auditory experience to produce typical volitional nonverbal vocalizations.Communications psychology · 2024Article
- Vocal learning-associated convergent evolution in mammalian proteins and regulatory elements.Science (New York, N.Y.) · 2024Article
- Songbird species that display more-complex vocal learning are better problem-solvers and have larger brains.Science (New York, N.Y.) · 2023Article
- Phylogenetic signal in the vocalizations of vocal learning and vocal non-learning birds.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021Article
- Vocal learning in animals and humans.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Songbirds as a whole are considered to be vocal production learners, meaning that they modify the structure of their vocalizations as a result of experience with the vocalizations of others. The more than 4000 species of songbirds, however, vary greatly in crucial features of song development. Variable features include: (i) the normality of the songs of early-deafened birds, reflecting the importance of innate motor programmes in song development; (ii) the normality of the songs of isolation-reared birds, reflecting the combined importance of innate auditory templates and motor programmes; (iii) the degree of selectivity in choice of external models; (iv) the accuracy of copying from external models; and (v) whether or not learning from external models continues into adulthood. We suggest that because of this variability, some songbird species, specifically those that are able to develop songs in the normal range without exposure to external models, can be classified as limited vocal learners. Those species that require exposure to external models to develop songs in the normal range can be considered complex vocal learners. This article is part of the theme issue 'Vocal learning in animals and humans'.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.