Abstract

Primate vocalizations convey a variety of information to conspecifics. The acoustic traits of these vocalizations are an effective vocal fingerprint to discriminate between sibling species for taxonomic diagnosis. However, the vocal behavior of nocturnal primates has been poorly studied and there are few studies of their vocal repertoires. We compiled a vocal repertoire for the Endangered Sambirano mouse lemur, Microcebus sambiranensis, an unstudied nocturnal primate of northwestern Madagascar, and compared the acoustic properties of one of their call types to those of M. murinus and M. rufus. We recorded vocalizations from radio-collared individuals using handheld recorders over 3 months. We also conducted an acoustic survey to measure the vocal activity of M. sambiranensis in four forest habitat types at the study site. We identified and classified five vocalization types in M. sambiranensis. The vocal repertoires of the three Microcebus species contain very similar call types but have different acoustic properties, with one loud call type, the whistle, having significantly different acoustic properties between species. Our acoustic survey detected more calls of M. sambiranensis in secondary forest, riparian forest, and forest edge habitats, suggesting that individuals may prefer these habitat types over primary forest. Our results suggest interspecific differences in the vocal repertoire of mouse lemurs, and that these differences can be used to investigate habitat preference via acoustic surveys.

Highlights

  • Acoustic communication in animals carries a variety of information to conspecifics regarding predators, mating opportunities, and presence of food (Obrist 1995)

  • The Purr call of M. sambiranensis is at a lower frequency than that of the M. murinus Purr call (Glatston 1979) and both the Whistle Type 1 and Whistle Type 2 calls of M. sambiranensis are at higher frequencies than whistle calls of M. murinus

  • The Whistle Type 3 call of M. sambiranensis is similar to some of the short whistle calls described for M. murinus and M. rufus by Zimmermann et al (2000), as it is multiunit with interunit intervals that are less than double the duration of the call’s units

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Acoustic communication in animals carries a variety of information to conspecifics regarding predators, mating opportunities, and presence of food (Obrist 1995). Examining the bioacoustic structure of primate communications can be a useful, inexpensive, and noninvasive method to diagnose sibling species (Braune et al 2008; Zimmermann et al 2000), for cryptic species. Cryptic primates are often solitary so they must vocalize to find potential mates, and be able to discriminate between conspecifics, as well as between biologically and vocally similar members of sympatric cryptic species (Braune et al 2008). Species-specific acoustic communication can help animals to communicate successfully with conspecifics and to avoid the risk of breeding with other species

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call