Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40393492›Full record

ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2025

Diverse relationships between amplitude and frequency in bird vocalizations.

João C T Menezes, Jeffrey Podos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

João C T MenezesOrganismic and Evolutionary Biology Graduate Program, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA 01003, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4156-2934
Jeffrey PodosOrganismic and Evolutionary Biology Graduate Program, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA 01003, USA.

Funding

Fulbright AssociationUniversity of Massachusetts Amherst
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Animals use sounds to communicate in contexts that are crucial for survival and reproduction. One compelling feature of acoustic signals is that two main domains of variation-frequency and amplitude-can interact with each other for reasons both evolutionary and mechanistic, in ways that are framed by conflicting predictions. To explore this issue, we obtained amplitude-calibrated field recordings and assessed relationships between vocal frequency and amplitude in 53 species of birds. Our main findings are twofold. First, we identify considerable variation across species in their amplitude-frequency relationships, emerging as positive in 27 species, negative in 12 species and not discernible in 14 species. This variation, as well as results from phylogenetic models, suggests that amplitude-frequency relationships in birds are not governed by any universal rule. Second, throughout our sample-and particularly in oscines (songbirds)-we find that ranges of frequency variation are, by and large, amplitude-dependent, with 28 of our 35 most intensively sampled species producing broad ranges of frequencies at low amplitudes yet narrower ranges at high amplitudes. This finding is consistent with the idea that birds are constrained to produce high-amplitude songs only within the narrow ranges of frequencies that resonate most constructively within their vocal tracts-which, if upheld, could lead to intensity-complexity trade-offs at the song level.

Indexed as

BirdsVocalization, AnimalAcousticsAnimalsPhylogenySongbirdsSpecies Specificitybioacousticsbirdsongloudnesspitchsong productionsound pressure level

Identifiers

PMID40393492
PMCPMC12092130

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.