Effects of signal features and environmental noise on signal detection in the great tit, Parus major.

By Nina U. Pohl, H. Slabbekoorn, G. Klump, U. Langemann. 2009

94 citations recorded by the source corpus.

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

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d51fce8e89ef4551bac87faa7db9b9d3a7df30df

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. S. Zollinger
2. H. Brumm
3. D. Gil
4. Diego Llusia
5. David A. Luther
6. A. Horn
7. M. Leonard
8. H. Slabbekoorn

In Ecology

1. S. Zollinger
2. H. Brumm
3. Diego Llusia
4. D. Gil
5. David A. Luther
6. M. Leonard
7. A. Horn
8. H. Slabbekoorn

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

1. S. Zollinger
2. Diego Llusia
3. D. Gil
4. H. Brumm
5. David A. Luther
6. M. Leonard
7. A. Horn
8. M. Ritschard

Citations in the corpus

• The Bird Dawn Chorus Revisited (2020, background): “The sound transmission hypothesis has an important limitation (Mace 1987b): even if we accept that atmospheric conditions are on average best at dawn (Henwood and Fabrick 1979), or at least more constant (Brown and Handford 2003), the high number of birds singing at that time should impose huge perc”
• The evolution of the Lombard effect: 100 years of psychoacoustic research (2011, background): “Although great tits can detect high-frequency vocalizations more easily in low-frequency noise (Pohl et al., 2009) the actual benefits of highpitched songs for signal transmission in noise are very small in comparison to an increase in vocal amplitude (Nemeth & Brumm, 2010).”