The costs of singing in nightingales

By R. Thomas. 2002

87 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental Biology, Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3de49724205f1ec76d1d7d060987ef5f319538f3

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental Biology

1. D. Cheney
2. R. Seyfarth
3. Yang Hu
4. G. C. Cardoso
5. M. Naguib
6. Julia Fischer
7. P. J. Slater
8. D. Kitchen

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

1. D. Cheney
2. R. Seyfarth
3. Yang Hu
4. G. C. Cardoso
5. D. Irschick
6. M. Naguib
7. D. Gil
8. P. J. Slater

Citations in the corpus

• Artificial night lighting rather than traffic noise affects the daily timing of dawn and dusk singing in common European songbirds (2014, unknown): “Thomas RJ. 2002.”
• Song repertoire size is correlated with body measures and arrival date in common nightingales, Luscinia megarhynchos (2006, background): “For example, extensive nocturnal singing in common nightingales may be associated with increased metabolic costs (Thomas 2002).”
• Evaluating performance costs of sexually selected traits (2007, background): “…have demonstrated that males within a species with higher values for the putatively sexually selected trait have a decrease in overnight body mass (Thomas 2002), locomotor abilities (Langerhans et al. 2005; Karino et al. 2006) and survival (Ryan et al. 1982; 684 C. E. Oufiero & T. Garland Jr ©…”
• The energy cost of song in the canary, Serinus canaria (2003, background): “The measurements of metabolic rate of singing Carolina wrens (Eberhardt 1994) have generally been regarded as anomalously high (Gaunt et al. 1996; Oberweger & Goller 2001; Thomas 2002).”
• A functional perspective on sexual selection: insights and future prospects (2006, background): “However, although field observations suggest that bird calling is energetically expensive (e.g. Thomas 2002), support for this notion from laboratory studies is equivocal.”
• The Bird Dawn Chorus Revisited (2020, result): “For instance, they require a precise estimate of song costs, while the literature on this respect show ambiguous findings (Gaunt et al. 1996; Thomas 2002; Ward and Slater 2005; Ward et al. 2003).”
• Bird Song: The Interface of Evolution and Mechanism (2004, unknown): “Thomas (2002) found that fat stores in nightingales dropped considerably during nighttime singing bouts.”
• Predators and the breeding bird: behavioral and reproductive flexibility under the risk of predation (2009, background): “Body condition may affect song output in passerines (Thomas, 2002; Thomas & Cuthill, 2002), and it ought to be fairly easy to test the idea that body condition is reflected in risk-taking by singing males.”
• Habitat structure and the evolution of bird song: a meta-analysis of the evidence for the acoustic adaptation hypothesis (2007, background): “1995; Gil & Gahr 2002; Thomas 2002) and are known to vary with the characteristics of the vocal display including duration, intensity and acoustic frequency.”
• Are bird species that vocalize at higher frequencies preadapted to inhabit noisy urban areas (2009, background): “Some species sing louder when anthropogenic noise is louder (Cynx et al. 1998; Brumm 2004), which to some extent is energetically costly (Oberweger and Goller 2001; Thomas 2002; Ward et al. 2003), or sing at times when urban noise is less severe (Fuller et al. 2007).”
• Baboon loud calls advertise male quality: acoustic features and their relation to rank, age, and exhaustion (2004, background): “At present, it is difficult to assess the direct costs of animal vocalizations under field conditions (but see Thomas 2002).”
• Nocturnal and diurnal singing activity in the nightingale: correlations with mating status and breeding cycle (2002, background): “If nocturnal song is costly (Thomas 2002), the advertisement through nocturnal singing may be an honest signal reflecting male quality.”