Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Pyow but not hack calls of the male putty-nosed monkey (Cercopithcus nictitans) convey information about caller identity

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites

image of Behaviour

Individual differences within the acoustic structure of vocalisations have the potential to inform signal receivers about the identity of the caller. Such differences can often be explained by morphological differences of the signaller's sound production apparatus. Natural selection may have favoured individual variation within call types, especially if identity cues enhance call function. In addition, animals may modify their vocalisations such that they sound more similar to, or more distinct from those of neighbouring conspecifics. We recorded pyow and hack vocalisations from five recognised male putty-nosed monkeys (Cercopithecus nictitans) in Gashaka Gumti National Park, Nigeria. We analysed the temporal and spectral features of both call types to investigate whether the calls contained identity cues, and whether calls of neighbouring males were less or more different in their acoustic structure than expected by chance. More parameters were found to vary significantly between individuals within pyows than hacks, and whilst pyows could be correctly assigned to individual callers more often than would have been expected by chance, hacks could not. We found no relation between geographic distance and acoustic similarity of pyows and hacks.

Affiliations: 1: School of Human and Life Sciences, Roehampton University, London SW15 4JD, UK; 2: School of Psychology, University of St Andrews, St Andrews KY16 9JU, UK; 3: School of Human and Life Sciences, Roehampton University, London SW15 4JD, UK;, Email: s.semple@roehampton.ac.uk

10.1163/156853908X396610
/content/journals/10.1163/156853908x396610
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
6
3
Loading
Loading

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/156853908x396610
Loading

Data & Media loading...

http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/156853908x396610
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/156853908x396610
2009-07-01
2016-08-24

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation