Cited by 67Animal Vocal Communication and BehaviorMarine animal studies overviewWildlife Ecology and Conservation

NORTH AMERICAN ELK BUGLE VOCALIZATIONS: MALE AND FEMALE BUGLE CALL STRUCTURE AND CONTEXT

Feighny, J. A., Williamson, K. E., Clarke, J. A.·2006·Journal of Mammalogy

Abstract

Bugle calls of male North American elk (Cervus elaphus) are common sounds during fall in the Canadian and United States Rocky Mountains. In contrast, bugle calls of female elk are rarely heard. We quantified the acoustic structure of elk bugle calls, which is an essential 1st step to understanding of the function of the call. We also investigated whether motivation-structural rules apply to these long-distance calls. We measured male elk bugle calls in Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado, during autumn of 1998 and 1999 and we measured female elk bugle calls on 2 Colorado elk ranches (private establishments that raise elk for commercial purposes) during spring of 2001 and 2002. All bugle calls had 3 segments: on-glide, whistle, and off-glide. Male bugle calls were longer in duration than female bugle calls (P < 0.01). Bugle calls emitted in aggressive interactions had 4 or 5 low-frequency formants, resulting in harsher, wider bandwidth bugles (P < 0.001) compared to the tonal calls emitted in nonaggressive contexts, which lacked formants. Thus, elk bugle calls appear to conform to motivation-structural rules.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1644/06-mamm-a-079r2.1

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Studies in other taxa such as birds, mammals, amphibians and arthropods suggest the context of acoustic signal production is an important factor affecting the parameters of acoustic signals measured.

    “Studies in other taxa such as birds (Stowell et al. 2017), mammals (Feighny et al. 2006; Caselli et al. 2014), amphibians (Toledo et al. 2015) and arthropods (Fukutomi and Ogawa 2017; Dobai et al. 2018; Kerchev 2019) suggest the context of acoustic signal production is an important factor affecting the parameters of acoustic signals measured.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. AUGUST, P. V., AND J. G. T. ANDERSON. 1987. Mammal sounds and motivation-structural rules: a test of the hypothesis. Journal of Mammalogy 68:1-9.
  2. CLUTTON-BROCK, T., F. GUINNESS, AND S. ALBON. 1982. Red deer: behavior and ecology of two sexes. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois.
  3. COMPTON, L. A., J. A. CLARKE, J. SEIDENSTICKER, AND D. R. INGRISANO. 2001. Acoustic characteristics of white-nosed coati vocalizations: a test of motivation-structural rules, Journal of Mammalogy 82: 1054-1058.
  4. DE VOS, A., P. BROKX, AND V. GEIST. 1967. A review of social behavior of the North American cervids during the reproductive period. American Midland Naturalist 77:390-417.
  5. FITCH, W. T. 2000. The evolution of speech: a comparative review. Trends in Cognitive Science 4:258-267.
  6. FITCH, W. T., AND D. REBY. 2001. The descended larynx is not uniquely human. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B. Biological Sciences 268:1669-1675.
  7. GEIST, V. 1982. Adaptive behavioral strategies. Pp. 219-278 in Elk of North America: ecology and management (J. W. Thomas and D. E. Toweill, eds.). Stackpole Books, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
  8. HAUSER, M. D. 1996. The evolution of communication. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, Cambridge.
  9. MORTON, E. S. 1982. Grading, discreteness, redundancy, and motivation-structural rules. Pp. 183-212 in Acoustic communica- tion in birds (D. Kroodsma and E. H. Miller, eds.). Academic Press, New York.
  10. MURIE, O. J. 1932. Elk calls. Journal of Mammalogy 13:331-336.
  11. RIEDE, T., AND W. T. FITCH. 1999. Vocal tract length and acoustics of vocalization in the domestic dog Canis familiaris. Journal of Experimental Biology 202:2859-2867.

Cited by

Authors
Feighny, J. A., Williamson, K. E., & Clarke, J. A.
Affiliations
University of Northern Colorado (US)
Corresponding author
Clarke, J. A.
Venue
Journal of Mammalogy
Published
2006-12
Volume
87
Issue
6
Pages
1072-1077
ISSN
  • 0022-2372 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-1542
OpenAlex
W2027796021
Cited by
67
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 4
FWCI
1.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Mammalogy (publishedVersion)
  • BioOne Complete (BioOne) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Northern Colorado
  • Universiteit van Amsterdam
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology › Animal Vocal Communication and Behavior
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Marine animal studies overview
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
Keywords
elk, red deer, bugle calls, vocalizations, acoustic structure, sex differences, aggressive interactions, formants, long-distance calls, Rocky Mountains, Rocky Mountain National Park

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