Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
1
Figure 1 Waveforms of example stimuli illustrating how within-individual variation was manipulated. Invariant signals ... Figure 1 Waveforms of example stimuli illustrating how within-individual variation was manipulated. Invariant signals were identical at every presentation (CV<sub>w</sub> = 0). (A) Five representative calls from each level of within-individual variation in pulse rate. Low (CV<sub>w</sub> = 0.004), mean (CV<sub>w</sub> = 0.010), and high (CV<sub>w</sub> = 0.030) within-individual variation calls had pulse rates drawn from normal distributions. Light gray boxes highlight the 20th pulse of each call to aid in visualizing variable pulse rates. (B) One representative sequence of calls from each level of within-individual variation in call rate. Low (CV<sub>w</sub> = 0.105), mean (CV<sub>w</sub> = 0.306), and high (CV<sub>w</sub> = 0.050) within-individual variation sequences had call rates drawn from normal distributions. Light gray boxes highlight the 10th call in each sequence to aid in visualizing variable call rates. Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content of this slide: © The Author(s) Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model ( Behav Ecol, Volume 30, Issue 1, 07 December 2018, Pages 80–91, The content of this slide may be subject to copyright: please see the slide notes for details.
2
Figure 2 Coefficients of variation in (A–C) pulse rate and (D–F) call rate were not predicted by individual ... Figure 2 Coefficients of variation in (A–C) pulse rate and (D–F) call rate were not predicted by individual differences in body condition or two measures of body size (mass and SVL). Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content of this slide: © The Author(s) Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model ( Behav Ecol, Volume 30, Issue 1, 07 December 2018, Pages 80–91, The content of this slide may be subject to copyright: please see the slide notes for details.
3
Figure 3 Results from phonotaxis tests in which pulse rate was variable. The top row of plots shows the effect of ... Figure 3 Results from phonotaxis tests in which pulse rate was variable. The top row of plots shows the effect of within-individual variability (CV<sub>w</sub>) on (A) the probability that a female chose the variable alternative stimulus [P(Alternative)] over the invariant standard stimulus and (B) her latency to respond. In plots A and B, the distributions of realized coefficients of variation are plotted within levels of within-individual variability (“low”, “mean,” and “high”) on the second (right-side) y-axis as solid black lines. The bottom row shows the effect of the centered realized mean alternative pulse rate on (C) the probability that a female chose the alternative stimulus [P(Alternative)] and (D) her latency to respond. In all plots, the thicker, blue lines show data from the quiet condition and grayscale lines show data from each level of chorus-shaped background noise. Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content of this slide: © The Author(s) Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model ( Behav Ecol, Volume 30, Issue 1, 07 December 2018, Pages 80–91, The content of this slide may be subject to copyright: please see the slide notes for details.
4
Figure 4 Results from phonotaxis tests in which call rate was variable
Figure 4 Results from phonotaxis tests in which call rate was variable. The top row of plots shows the effect of ... Figure 4 Results from phonotaxis tests in which call rate was variable. The top row of plots shows the effect of within-individual variability (CV<sub>w</sub>) on (A) the probability that a female chose the variable alternative stimulus [P(Alternative)] over the invariant standard stimulus and (B) her latency to respond. In plots A and B, the distributions of realized coefficients of variation are plotted within levels of within-individual variability (“low,” “mean,” and “high”) on the second (right-side) y-axis as solid black lines. The bottom row shows the effect of the centered realized mean alternative pulse rate on (C) the probability that a female chose the alternative stimulus [P(Alternative)] and (D) her latency to respond. In all plots, the thicker, red lines show data from the quiet condition and grayscale lines show data from each level of chorus-shaped background noise. Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content of this slide: © The Author(s) Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model ( Behav Ecol, Volume 30, Issue 1, 07 December 2018, Pages 80–91, The content of this slide may be subject to copyright: please see the slide notes for details.
Similar presentations
