Author
Listed:
- Helen Olofsson
- Maria R. Servedio
Abstract
One hypothesis explaining the species richness of the songbirds is based on the fact that these species generally acquire their songs socially rather than genetically. Here we consider the outcome of secondary contact between birds that have developed distinct song dialects in allopatry. We ask 2 questions: 1) given a fixed probability of learning, how do the songs evolve in sympatry and 2) would evolution tend to increase or decrease the genetic, versus cultural, determination of song in this situation? We assume that the 2 local dialects can be both genetically determined and learned via song copying, whereas a third category of song, mixed song, is only learned. We evaluate both questions assuming 3 different ways that mixed song can be generated in addition to learning via copying. We find that when the probability of learning is fixed, local dialects can generally be maintained even when a substantial majority of males produce learned songs. Song differentiation will, however, be lost if song learning itself can evolve. This is partly a result of a positive feedback mechanism; mixed songs are readily accepted by all females, leading to selection favoring an allele which increases the probability that males will produce those songs. This in turn increases the frequency of mixed songs, making it harder for dialects to be maintained. As human disturbance alters species ranges, partially differentiated populations may increasingly come into contact; this work predicts that song differentiation may indeed tend to be lost under a significant proportion of these conditions. Copyright 2008, Oxford University Press.
Suggested Citation
Helen Olofsson & Maria R. Servedio, 2008.
"Sympatry affects the evolution of genetic versus cultural determination of song,"
Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 19(3), pages 596-604.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:beheco:v:19:y:2008:i:3:p:596-604
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:19:y:2008:i:3:p:596-604. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.