Cookies Policy

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

Semantics of an Avian Alarm Call System: the Male Domestic Fowl, Gallus Domesticus

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
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of Behaviour

Vocal alarm signals of male domestic fowl given in the presence of predators and other ground and aerial objects were recorded and analyzed. Studies were conducted under semi-naturalistic conditions and a telemetric technique was used to facilitate high quality sound recording. Cockerels gave ground alarm calls specifically to objects moving on the substrate and aerial alarm calls to objects moving above in free space. Vocalizations were associated with both dangerous and harmless objects. We therefore investigated variation in sound structure of aerial alarm calls with reference to flying predators and non-predators. A multidimensional contingency table analysis revealed a significant tendency for qualitatively different aerial alarm calls to be associated with flying predators and non-predators. Differences in call structure were restricted to the two first units of the alarm call. We tested the hypotheses that variation in aerial alarm call structure might be affected by either the distance separating the bird from the object or the angular size of the object projected onto the retina of the cockerel. Statistical analysis showed that the angular size was a good predictor of variation of the second unit of alarm call. The distance it self was less predictive. The first unit of the alarm call was not affected by either the distance or the angular size of the object. We propose that this part of the call has a more general function of alerting the conspecific companions. We conclude that alarm vocalizations of male domestic fowl refer specifically to a certain type of stimulus object, either moving on the ground or flying. For alarm calls correlated with aerial stimuli the specific angular size of a stimulus object moving in the air is a good predictor of call structure. We suggest that this way of dealing with flying objects as stimuli for alarm calls is the result of a predator detection strategy in which the benefits of an expanded field of vision, an important adaptation for ground-dwelling birds, exceed the costs of alarming to harmless birds and other aerial objects.

Affiliations: 1: The Rockefeller University, Field Research Center, Millbrook, New York 12545, U.S.A.


Full text loading...


Data & Media loading...

Article metrics loading...



Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
    Behaviour — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation