Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Convergent Evolution01:54

Convergent Evolution

29.4K
Evolution shapes the features of organisms over time, ensuring that they are suited for the environments in which they live. Sometimes, selection pressure leads to the rise of similar but unrelated adaptations in organisms with no recent common ancestors, a process known as convergent evolution.
29.4K
Auditory Perception01:17

Auditory Perception

647
The auditory system is essential for sound perception, utilizing various critical structures. When sound waves enter the outer ear, they travel through the ear canal and cause the eardrum to vibrate. These vibrations are then transmitted to the middle ear, where three tiny bones – the malleus, incus, and stapes – amplify the sound. This amplification is crucial, as it ensures that the sound vibrations are strong enough to be conveyed to the inner ear. These vibrations then reach the...
647
The Cochlea01:13

The Cochlea

46.7K
The cochlea is a coiled structure in the inner ear that contains hair cells—the sensory receptors of the auditory system. Sound waves are transmitted to the cochlea by small bones attached to the eardrum called the ossicles, which vibrate the oval window that leads to the inner ear. This causes fluid in the chambers of the cochlea to move, vibrating the basilar membrane.
46.7K
Genetics of Speciation02:16

Genetics of Speciation

19.9K
Speciation is the evolutionary process resulting in the formation of new, distinct species—groups of reproductively isolated populations.
19.9K
Types of Selection01:46

Types of Selection

42.3K
Natural selection influences the frequencies of particular alleles and phenotypes within populations in several different ways. Primarily, natural selection can be directional, stabilizing, or disruptive. Directional selection favors one extreme trait and shifts the population towards that phenotype while selecting against individuals displaying alternate traits. Stabilizing selection favors an intermediate trait with a narrow range of variation. Deviation from the optimal phenotype towards an...
42.3K
Frequency-dependent Selection01:21

Frequency-dependent Selection

22.3K
When the fitness of a trait is influenced by how common it is (i.e., its frequency) relative to different traits within a population, this is referred to as frequency-dependent selection. Frequency-dependent selection may occur between species or within a single species. This type of selection can either be positive—with more common phenotypes having higher fitness—or negative, with rarer phenotypes conferring increased fitness.
22.3K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Warts and all: evolutionary and ecological patterns in frog skin texture.

Journal of evolutionary biology·2026
Same author

A general mechanism of airborne hearing in recent and early non-tympanate tetrapods.

The Journal of experimental biology·2026
Same author

Tadpole and Frog Skin Thicknesses are Evolutionarily Decoupled.

Integrative and comparative biology·2026
Same author

Hearing and anatomy of the ear of the European hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus.

Biology letters·2026
Same author

Lungless tadpoles breathe fresh air into hypotheses for tetrapod lung loss and trait regain.

Evolution; international journal of organic evolution·2025
Same author

Organization of the Auditory Brainstem in a Lizard, Gekko gecko. II. Afferent and Efferent Projections of Nuclei of the Lateral Lemniscus and the Torus Semicircularis.

The Journal of comparative neurology·2025
Same journal

"Mind Over Muscle": Neural and Biomechanical Signatures of Expertise in Early Stone Tool Use.

Brain, behavior and evolution·2026
Same journal

A step forward in encephalization: the virtual endocast of the Middle Pleistocene hominin from Ceprano, Italy.

Brain, behavior and evolution·2026
Same journal

Anatomical and Volumetric Description of the Baird's Beaked Whale (Berardius bairdii) brain from Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Brain, behavior and evolution·2026
Same journal

Immunohistochemical Staining of the Brain of the Tuatara Sphenodon punctatus.

Brain, behavior and evolution·2026
Same journal

Macroevolutionary patterns of endocast lateralization in catarrhines and fossil hominins.

Brain, behavior and evolution·2026
Same journal

Phylogenetic patterns and genomic correlates of pronounced neocortical reduction in New World monkeys.

Brain, behavior and evolution·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Oct 3, 2025

Determining Ultrasonic Vocalization Preferences in Mice using a Two-choice Playback Test
08:16

Determining Ultrasonic Vocalization Preferences in Mice using a Two-choice Playback Test

Published on: September 3, 2015

11.4K

Peripheral Auditory System Divergence Does Not Explain Species Differences in Call Preference.

Kim L Hoke1, Jakob Christensen-Dalsgaard2, Molly C Womack1,3

  • 1Biology Department, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA.

Brain, Behavior and Evolution
|February 13, 2022
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

In frogs, auditory system tuning doesn't match preferred mating call frequencies, challenging the matched filter hypothesis. Species' auditory sensitivity differences, not peak sensitivity, influence mate choice and signal evolution.

Keywords:
Acoustic communicationAmphibianAuditory brainstem responsesHearingMate choice

More Related Videos

Selective Tracing of Auditory Fibers in the Avian Embryonic Vestibulocochlear Nerve
11:27

Selective Tracing of Auditory Fibers in the Avian Embryonic Vestibulocochlear Nerve

Published on: March 18, 2013

9.3K
Data Acquisition and Analysis In Brainstem Evoked Response Audiometry In Mice
08:51

Data Acquisition and Analysis In Brainstem Evoked Response Audiometry In Mice

Published on: May 10, 2019

11.9K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Oct 3, 2025

Determining Ultrasonic Vocalization Preferences in Mice using a Two-choice Playback Test
08:16

Determining Ultrasonic Vocalization Preferences in Mice using a Two-choice Playback Test

Published on: September 3, 2015

11.4K
Selective Tracing of Auditory Fibers in the Avian Embryonic Vestibulocochlear Nerve
11:27

Selective Tracing of Auditory Fibers in the Avian Embryonic Vestibulocochlear Nerve

Published on: March 18, 2013

9.3K
Data Acquisition and Analysis In Brainstem Evoked Response Audiometry In Mice
08:51

Data Acquisition and Analysis In Brainstem Evoked Response Audiometry In Mice

Published on: May 10, 2019

11.9K

Area of Science:

  • Animal Behavior
  • Auditory Neuroscience
  • Evolutionary Biology

Background:

  • Receiver sensory systems drive mate preferences and signal evolution.
  • The matched filter hypothesis predicts auditory system tuning matches mate call frequencies.
  • Frequency modulation in animal communication signals is understudied.

Purpose of the Study:

  • Investigate auditory sensitivity and mate preferences in three cryptic frog species.
  • Test the matched filter hypothesis in Engystomops (=Physalaemus) frogs with frequency-modulated calls.
  • Determine how auditory sensitivity influences neural responses and behavioral mate choice.

Main Methods:

  • Analyzed auditory sensitivity (audiograms) of three cryptic frog species.
  • Measured female mate preferences for calls with varying frequencies.
  • Modeled neural responses based on species-specific auditory sensitivity.
  • Compared auditory brainstem responses with behavioral preferences.

Main Results:

  • Species exhibited differences in auditory sensitivity across frequency ranges, not just peak sensitivity.
  • Auditory brainstem responses did not consistently align with behavioral mate preferences.
  • A mismatch exists between auditory processing and observed mate choice in these frogs.

Conclusions:

  • The matched filter hypothesis does not explain species-specific differences in frog calls and mate preferences.
  • Auditory sensitivity variation, particularly within specific frequency ranges, plays a key role in mate selection.
  • This study reveals a complex interplay between auditory perception and sexual selection in anuran communication.