CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 481Animal Vocal Communication and BehaviorAnimal Behavior and ReproductionAvian ecology and behavior

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 106 of the 106 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Brain development, song learning and mate choice in birds: a review and experimental test of the "nutritional stress hypothesis"

S., Nowicki, W., Searcy, S., Peters·2002·Journal of Comparative Physiology A: Sensory, Neural, and Behavioral Physiology
DOI 10.1007/s00359-002-0361-3
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The nutritional stress hypothesis explains how learned features of song, such as complexity and local dialect structure, can serve as indicators of male quality of interest to females in mate choice. The link between song and quality comes about because the brain structures underlying song learning largely develop during the first few months post-hatching. During this same period, songbirds are likely to be subject to nutritional and other stresses. Only individuals faring well in the face of stress are able to invest the resources in brain development necessary to optimize song learning. Learned features of song thus become reliable indicators of male quality, with reliability maintained by the developmental costs of song. We review the background and assumptions of the nutritional stress hypothesis, and present new experimental data demonstrating an effect of nestling nutrition on nestling growth, brain development, and song learning, providing support for a key prediction of the hypothesis.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00359-002-0361-3

Cites

106 of 106 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 481

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
S., N., W., S., & S., P.
Venue
Journal of Comparative Physiology A: Sensory, Neural, and Behavioral Physiology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2002-12-01
Volume
188
Issue
11-12
Pages
1003-1014
ISSN
  • 0340-7594 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1351
DOI
10.1007/s00359-002-0361-3
OpenAlex
W2117191589
Cited by
481
References
106
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 60 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 21
FWCI
9.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of Comparative Physiology A (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Vocal Communication and Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Avian ecology and behavior
Keywords
song learning, mate choice, song complexity, dialect structure, male quality, nestling growth, sexual selection
MeSH terms
Age Factors, Animals, Birds, Body Weight, Brain, Biological Evolution, Feathers, Female, Learning, Male, Nutritional Physiological Phenomena, Sex, Sound Spectrography, Stress, Physiological, Telencephalon, Vocalization, Animal, Voice, Prosencephalon, Statistics, Nonparametric

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review