*Result*: Beyond Song-An Investigation of Song and Social Preferences in a Monogamous Songbird.
Title:
Beyond Song-An Investigation of Song and Social Preferences in a Monogamous Songbird.
Authors:
Elson MR; Department of Psychology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA., Hsu RK; Department of Psychology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA., Ophir AG; Department of Psychology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA., Prior NH; Department of Psychology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA.
Source:
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences [Ann N Y Acad Sci] 2026 Mar; Vol. 1557 (1), pp. e70216.
Publication Type:
Journal Article
Language:
English
Journal Info:
Publisher: New York Academy of Sciences Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 7506858 Publication Model: Print Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1749-6632 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 00778923 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Ann N Y Acad Sci Subsets: MEDLINE
Imprint Name(s):
Publication: 2006- : New York, NY : Malden, MA : New York Academy of Sciences ; Blackwell
Original Publication: New York, The Academy.
Original Publication: New York, The Academy.
MeSH Terms:
References:
J. W. Bradbury and S. L. Vehrencamp Principles of Animal Communication, 2nd ed. (Sinauer, 2011).
H. Brumm and M. Naguib, “Chapter 1 Environmental Acoustics and the Evolution of Bird Song,” in Advances in the Study of Behavior (Academic Press, 2009), 1–33, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065‐3454(09)40001‐9.
C. K. Catchpole and P. J. B. Slater Bird Song: Biological Themes and Variations (Cambridge University Press, 2003).
M. Amy, P. Salvin, M. Naguib, and G. Leboucher, “Female Signalling to Male Song in the Domestic Canary, Serinus Canaria,” Royal Society Open Science 2, no. 1 (2015): 140196, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.140196.
C. Bartsch, H. Hultsch, C. Scharff, and S. Kipper, “What Is the Whistle All About? A Study on Whistle Songs, Related Male Characteristics, and Female Song Preferences in Common Nightingales,” Journal of Ornithology 157, no. 1 (2016): 49–60, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10336‐015‐1245‐y.
M. J. Coleman, N. F. Day, and E. S. Fortune, “Neural Mechanisms for Turn‐Taking in Duetting Plain‐Tailed Wrens,” Frontiers in Neural Circuits 16 (2022): 970434, https://doi.org/10.3389/fncir.2022.970434.
J. L. Dunning, S. Pant, A. Bass, Z. Coburn, and J. F. Prather, “Mate Choice in Adult Female Bengalese Finches: Females Express Consistent Preferences for Individual Males and Prefer Female‐Directed Song Performances,” PLoS ONE 9, no. 2 (2014): e89438, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0089438.
W. Halfwerk, S. Bot, J. Buikx, et al., “Low‐Frequency Songs Lose Their Potency in Noisy Urban Conditions,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108, no. 35 (2011): 14549–14554, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1109091108.
S. Kipper, S. Kiefer, C. Bartsch, and M. Weiss, “Female Calling? Song Responses to Conspecific Call Playbacks in Nightingales, Luscinia megarhynchos,” Animal Behaviour 100 (2015): 60–66, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2014.11.011.
N. H. Prior, A. R. Fishbein, E. M. Garcia, et al., “Assessing Female Call Responses to Syllable Level Details in Song,” Frontiers in Psychology 16 (2025): 1523105, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1523105.
M. Soma and M. Iwama, “Mating Success Follows Duet Dancing in the Java Sparrow,” PLoS ONE 12, no. 3 (2017): e0172655, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0172655.
L. Van Ruijssevelt, Y. Chen, K. von Eugen, et al., “fMRI Reveals a Novel Region for Evaluating Acoustic Information for Mate Choice in a Female Songbird,” Current Biology 28 (2018): 711–721, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2018.01.048.
P. R. Marler and H. Slabbekoorn Nature's Music: The Science of Birdsong (Elsevier, 2004).
C. E. Shannon, “A Mathematical Theory of Communication,” Bell System Technical Journal 27, no. 3 (1948): 379–423, https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538‐7305.1948.tb01338.x.
D. K. Berlo, “Communication as Process: Review and Commentary,” Communication Yearbook 1, no. 1 (1977): 11–27, https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.1977.11923667.
D. L. Kincaid, “The Convergence Model of communication,” in Papers of the East‐West Communication Institute (1979), http://hdl.handle.net/10125/48094.
W. Forstmeier and T. R. Birkhead, “Repeatability of Mate Choice in the Zebra Finch: Consistency Within and Between Females,” Animal Behaviour 68, no. 5 (2004): 1017–1028, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.02.007.
M.‐J. Holveck and K. Riebel, “Female Zebra Finches Learn to Prefer More Than One Song and From More Than One Tutor,” Animal Behaviour 88 (2014): 125–135, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2013.11.023.
M.‐J. Holveck and K. Riebel, “Preferred Songs Predict Preferred Males: Consistency and Repeatability of Zebra Finch Females Across Three Test Contexts,” Animal Behaviour 74, no. 2 (2007): 297–309, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2006.08.016.
G. G. Rosenthal Mate Choice: The Evolution of Sexual Decision Making From Microbes to Humans (Princeton University Press, 2017).
A. N. Rutstein, J. Brazill‐Boast, and S. C. Griffith, “Evaluating Mate Choice in the Zebra Finch,” Animal Behaviour 74, no. 5 (2007): 1277–1284, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2007.02.022.
A. Fogel and A. Garvey, “Alive Communication,” Infant Behavior and Development 30, no. 2 (2007): 251–257, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2007.02.007.
K. Grammer, K. B. Kruck, and M. S. Magnusson, “The Courtship Dance: Patterns of Nonverbal Synchronization in Opposite‐Sex Encounters,” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 22, no. 1 (1998): 3–29, https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022986608835.
N. Ota, M. Gahr, and M. Soma, “Couples Showing Off: Audience Promotes Both Male and Female Multimodal Courtship Display in a Songbird,” Science Advances 4, no. 10 (2017): eaat4779, http://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/sciadv.aat4779.
J. G. Pfaus, A. Safron, and E. Zakreski, “From Distal to Proximal to Interactive: Behavioral and Brain Synchrony During Attraction, Courtship, and Sexual Interaction—Implications for Clinical Assessments of Relationship Style and Quality,” Sexual Medicine Reviews 11, no. 4 (2023): 312–322, https://doi.org/10.1093/sxmrev/qead034.
N. H. Prior, E. Smith, R. J. Dooling, and G. F. Ball, “Familiarity Enhances Moment‐to‐Moment Behavioral Coordination in Zebra Finch (Taeniopygia guttata) Dyads,” Journal of Comparative Psychology (Washington, DC: 1983) 134, no. 2 (2020): 135–148, https://doi.org/10.1037/com0000201.
T. S. Roth, I. Samara, J. Tan, E. Prochazkova, and M. E. Kret, “A Comparative Framework of Inter‐Individual Coordination and Pair‐Bonding,” Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 39 (2021): 98–105, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.03.005.
M. Soma, M. Iwama, R. Nakajima, and R. Endo, “Early‐Life Lessons of the Courtship Dance in a Dance‐Duetting Songbird, the Java Sparrow,” Royal Society Open Science 6, no. 6 (2019): 190563, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.190563.
M. Ihle, B. Kempenaers, and W. Forstmeier, “Fitness Benefits of Mate Choice for Compatibility in a Socially Monogamous Species,” PLoS Biology 13, no. 9 (2015): e1002248, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002248.
T. R. Spoon, J. R. Millam, and D. H. Owings, “The Importance of Mate Behavioural Compatibility in Parenting and Reproductive Success by Cockatiels, Nymphicus hollandicus,” Animal Behaviour 71, no. 2 (2006): 315–326, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.03.034.
N. S. Clayton and E. Pröve, “Song Discrimination in Female Zebra Finches and Bengalese Finches,” Animal Behaviour 38, no. 2 (1989): 352–354, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003‐3472(89)80096‐X.
R. A. Zann The Zebra Finch: A Synthesis of Field and Laboratory Studies (Oxford University Press, 1996).
P. B. D'Amelio, L. Trost, and A. ter Maat, “Vocal Exchanges During Pair Formation and Maintenance in the Zebra Finch (Taeniopygia guttata),” Frontiers in Zoology 14, no. 1 (2017): 13, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12983‐017‐0197‐x.
J. E. Elie, M. M. Mariette, H. A. Soula, S. C. Griffith, N. Mathevon, and C. Vignal, “Vocal Communication at the Nest Between Mates in Wild Zebra Finches: A Private Vocal Duet?,” Animal Behaviour 80, no. 4 (2010): 597–605, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2010.06.003.
J. E. Elie and F. E. Theunissen, “The Vocal Repertoire of the Domesticated Zebra Finch: A Data‐Driven Approach to Decipher the Information‐Bearing Acoustic Features of Communication Signals,” Animal Cognition 19, no. 2 (2016): 285–315, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071‐015‐0933‐6.
N. H. Prior, E. Smith, R. J. Dooling, and G. F. Ball, “Monogamy in a Moment: How Do Brief Social Interactions Change over Time in Pair‐Bonded Zebra Finches (Taeniopygia guttata)?,” Integrative Organismal Biology 2, no. 1 (2020): obaa034, https://doi.org/10.1093/iob/obaa034.
N. H. Prior, “What's in a Moment: What Can Be Learned about Pair Bonding From Studying Moment‐to‐Moment Behavioral Synchrony between Partners?,” Frontiers in Psychology 11 (2020): 1370, https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01370.
J. H. Bruno, E. D. Jarvis, M. Liberman, and O. Tchernichovski, “Birdsong Learning and Culture: Analogies With Human Spoken Language,” Annual Review of Linguistics 7 (2021): 449–472, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev‐linguistics‐090420‐121034.
S. C. Woolley and A. J. Doupe, “Social Context–Induced Song Variation Affects Female Behavior and Gene Expression,” PLoS Biology 6, no. 3 (2008): e62, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0060062.
Y. Chen, O. Clark, and S. C. Woolley, “Courtship Song Preferences in Female Zebra Finches Are Shaped by Developmental Auditory Experience,” Proceedings of the Royal Society 284, no. 1855 (2017): 20170054, https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2017.0054.
H. E. Schubloom and S. C. Woolley, “Variation in Social Relationships Relates to Song Preferences and EGR1 Expression in a Female Songbird,” Developmental Neurobiology 76, no. 9 (2015): 1029–1040, https://doi.org/10.1002/dneu.22373.
L. F. Gill, W. Goymann, A. Ter Maat, and M. Gahr, “Patterns of Call Communication Between Group‐Housed Zebra Finches Change During the Breeding Cycle,” Elife 4 (2015): e07770, https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.07770.
E. C. Perez, J. E. Elie, C. O. Soulage, H. A. Soula, N. Mathevon, and C. Vignal, “The Acoustic Expression of Stress in a Songbird: Does Corticosterone Drive Isolation‐Induced Modifications of Zebra Finch Calls?,” Hormones and Behavior 61, no. 4 (2012): 573–581, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2012.02.004.
H. Wickham, M. Averick, J. Bryan, et al., “Welcome to the Tidyverse,” Journal of Open Source Software 4, no. 43 (2019): 1686, https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01686.
D. Bates, M. Mächler, B. Bolker, and S. Walker, “Fitting Linear Mixed‐Effects Models Using lme4,” Journal of Statistical Software 67 (2015): 1–48, https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01.
R. V. Lenth (2025). emmeans: Estimated Marginal Means, aka Least‐Squares Means (Version R Package Version 1.11.0) [Computer Software], https://github.com/rvlenth/emmeans.
J. I. Benichov, E. Globerson, and O. Tchernichovski, “Finding the Beat: From Socially Coordinated Vocalizations in Songbirds to Rhythmic Entrainment in Humans,” Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 10 (2016): 255, https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2016.00255.
I. C. A. Boucaud, E. C. Perez, L. S. Ramos, S. C. Griffith, and C. Vignal, “Acoustic Communication in Zebra Finches Signals When Mates Will Take Turns With Parental Duties,” Behavioral Ecology 28, no. 3 (2017): 645–656, https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arw189.
I. C. A. Boucaud, M. L. N. Aguirre Smith, P. A. Valère, and C. Vignal, “Incubating Females Signal Their Needs During Intrapair Vocal Communication at the Nest: A Feeding Experiment in Great Tits,” Animal Behaviour 122 (2016): 77–86, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2016.09.021.
A. S. Villain, M. S. A. Fernandez, C. Bouchut, H. A. Soula, and C. Vignal, “Songbird Mates Change Their Call Structure and Intrapair Communication at the Nest in Response to Environmental Noise,” Animal Behaviour 116 (2016): 113–129, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2016.03.009.
S. C. Griffith, “Cooperation and Coordination in Socially Monogamous Birds: Moving Away from a Focus on Sexual Conflict,” Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 7 (2019): 455, https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2019.00455.
H. Loning, S. C. Griffith, and M. Naguib, “The Ecology of Zebra Finch Song and Its Implications for Vocal Communication in Multi‐Level Societies,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 379 (2024): 20230191, https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2023.0191.
H. Loning, S. C. Griffith, and M. Naguib, “Zebra Finch Song Is a Very Short‐Range Signal in the Wild: Evidence From an Integrated Approach,” Behavioral Ecology 33, no. 1 (2022): 37–46, https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arab107.
R. A. Fox and J. R. Millam, “Personality Traits of Pair Members Predict Pair Compatibility and Reproductive Success in a Socially Monogamous Parrot Breeding in Captivity,” Zoo Biology 33, no. 3 (2014): 166–172, https://doi.org/10.1002/zoo.21121.
W. W. Anderson, Y.‐K. Kim, and P. A. Gowaty, “Experimental Constraints on Mate Preferences in Drosophila pseudoobscura Decrease Offspring Viability and Fitness of Mated Pairs,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104, no. 11 (2007): 4484–4488, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0611152104.
H. B. Brandl, S. C. Griffith, D. R. Farine, and W. Schuett, “Wild Zebra Finches That Nest Synchronously Have Long‐Term Stable Social Ties,” Journal of Animal Ecology 90, no. 1 (2021): 76–86, https://doi.org/10.1111/1365‐2656.13082.
P. A. Gowaty, L. C. Drickamer, and S. Schmid‐Holmes, “Male House Mice Produce Fewer Offspring With Lower Viability and Poorer Performance When Mated With Females They Do Not Prefer,” Animal Behaviour 65, no. 1 (2003): 95–103, https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2002.2026.
G. L. Patricelli and E. A. Hebets, “New Dimensions in Animal Communication: The Case for Complexity,” Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 12 (2016): 80–89, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2016.09.011.
D. Gil, G. Leboucher, A. Lacroix, R. Cue, and M. Kreutzer, “Female Canaries Produce Eggs With Greater Amounts of Testosterone When Exposed to Preferred Male Song,” Hormones and Behavior 45, no. 1 (2004): 64–70, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2003.08.005.
G. Leboucher, V. Depraz, M. Kreutzer, and L. Nagle, “Male Song Stimulation of Female Reproduction in Canaries: Features Relevant to Sexual Displays Are Not Relevant to Nest‐Building or Egg‐Laying,” ethol 104, no. 7 (1998): 613–624, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439‐0310.1998.tb00096.x.
M. Monbureau, J. M. Barker, G. Leboucher, and J. Balthazart, “Male Song Quality Modulates c‐Fos Expression in the Auditory Forebrain of the Female Canary,” Physiology & Behavior 147 (2015): 7–15, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2015.04.005.
A. L. O'loghlen and M. D. Beecher, “Sexual Preferences for Mate Song Types in Female Song Sparrows,” Animal Behaviour 53, no. 4 (1997): 835–841, https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1996.0348.
S. W. Coleman, G. L. Patricelli, and G. Borgia, “Variable Female Preferences Drive Complex Male Displays,” Nature 428, no. 6984 (2004): 742–745, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02419.
G. L. Patricelli, S. W. Coleman, and G. Borgia, “Male Satin Bowerbirds, Ptilonorhynchus violaceus, Adjust Their Display Intensity in Response to Female Startling: An Experiment With Robotic Females,” Animal Behaviour 71, no. 1 (2006): 49–59, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.03.029.
G. L. Patricelli, J. A. C. Uy, G. Walsh, and G. Borgia, “Male Displays Adjusted to Female's Response,” Nature 415, no. 6869 (2002): 279–280, https://doi.org/10.1038/415279a.
S. S. Snow, G. L. Patricelli, C. T. Butts, et al., “Fighting Isn't Sexy in Lekking Greater Sage‐Grouse: A Relational Event Model Approach for Mating Interactions,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 292, no. 2047 (2025): 20242981, https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2024.2981.
N. Burley and C. B. Coopersmith, “Bill Color Preferences of Zebra Finches,” ethol 76, no. 2 (1987): 133–151, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439‐0310.1987.tb00679.x.
C. R. Dahlin and L. Benedict, “Angry Birds Need Not Apply: A Perspective on the Flexible Form and Multifunctionality of Avian Vocal Duets,” ethol 120, no. 1 (2014): 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1111/eth.12182.
N. Ota, M. Gahr, and M. Soma, “Tap Dancing Birds: The Multimodal Mutual Courtship Display of Males and Females in a Socially Monogamous Songbird,” Scientific Reports 5, no. 1 (2015): 16614, https://doi.org/10.1038/srep16614.
H. Brumm and M. Naguib, “Chapter 1 Environmental Acoustics and the Evolution of Bird Song,” in Advances in the Study of Behavior (Academic Press, 2009), 1–33, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065‐3454(09)40001‐9.
C. K. Catchpole and P. J. B. Slater Bird Song: Biological Themes and Variations (Cambridge University Press, 2003).
M. Amy, P. Salvin, M. Naguib, and G. Leboucher, “Female Signalling to Male Song in the Domestic Canary, Serinus Canaria,” Royal Society Open Science 2, no. 1 (2015): 140196, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.140196.
C. Bartsch, H. Hultsch, C. Scharff, and S. Kipper, “What Is the Whistle All About? A Study on Whistle Songs, Related Male Characteristics, and Female Song Preferences in Common Nightingales,” Journal of Ornithology 157, no. 1 (2016): 49–60, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10336‐015‐1245‐y.
M. J. Coleman, N. F. Day, and E. S. Fortune, “Neural Mechanisms for Turn‐Taking in Duetting Plain‐Tailed Wrens,” Frontiers in Neural Circuits 16 (2022): 970434, https://doi.org/10.3389/fncir.2022.970434.
J. L. Dunning, S. Pant, A. Bass, Z. Coburn, and J. F. Prather, “Mate Choice in Adult Female Bengalese Finches: Females Express Consistent Preferences for Individual Males and Prefer Female‐Directed Song Performances,” PLoS ONE 9, no. 2 (2014): e89438, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0089438.
W. Halfwerk, S. Bot, J. Buikx, et al., “Low‐Frequency Songs Lose Their Potency in Noisy Urban Conditions,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108, no. 35 (2011): 14549–14554, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1109091108.
S. Kipper, S. Kiefer, C. Bartsch, and M. Weiss, “Female Calling? Song Responses to Conspecific Call Playbacks in Nightingales, Luscinia megarhynchos,” Animal Behaviour 100 (2015): 60–66, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2014.11.011.
N. H. Prior, A. R. Fishbein, E. M. Garcia, et al., “Assessing Female Call Responses to Syllable Level Details in Song,” Frontiers in Psychology 16 (2025): 1523105, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1523105.
M. Soma and M. Iwama, “Mating Success Follows Duet Dancing in the Java Sparrow,” PLoS ONE 12, no. 3 (2017): e0172655, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0172655.
L. Van Ruijssevelt, Y. Chen, K. von Eugen, et al., “fMRI Reveals a Novel Region for Evaluating Acoustic Information for Mate Choice in a Female Songbird,” Current Biology 28 (2018): 711–721, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2018.01.048.
P. R. Marler and H. Slabbekoorn Nature's Music: The Science of Birdsong (Elsevier, 2004).
C. E. Shannon, “A Mathematical Theory of Communication,” Bell System Technical Journal 27, no. 3 (1948): 379–423, https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538‐7305.1948.tb01338.x.
D. K. Berlo, “Communication as Process: Review and Commentary,” Communication Yearbook 1, no. 1 (1977): 11–27, https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.1977.11923667.
D. L. Kincaid, “The Convergence Model of communication,” in Papers of the East‐West Communication Institute (1979), http://hdl.handle.net/10125/48094.
W. Forstmeier and T. R. Birkhead, “Repeatability of Mate Choice in the Zebra Finch: Consistency Within and Between Females,” Animal Behaviour 68, no. 5 (2004): 1017–1028, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.02.007.
M.‐J. Holveck and K. Riebel, “Female Zebra Finches Learn to Prefer More Than One Song and From More Than One Tutor,” Animal Behaviour 88 (2014): 125–135, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2013.11.023.
M.‐J. Holveck and K. Riebel, “Preferred Songs Predict Preferred Males: Consistency and Repeatability of Zebra Finch Females Across Three Test Contexts,” Animal Behaviour 74, no. 2 (2007): 297–309, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2006.08.016.
G. G. Rosenthal Mate Choice: The Evolution of Sexual Decision Making From Microbes to Humans (Princeton University Press, 2017).
A. N. Rutstein, J. Brazill‐Boast, and S. C. Griffith, “Evaluating Mate Choice in the Zebra Finch,” Animal Behaviour 74, no. 5 (2007): 1277–1284, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2007.02.022.
A. Fogel and A. Garvey, “Alive Communication,” Infant Behavior and Development 30, no. 2 (2007): 251–257, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2007.02.007.
K. Grammer, K. B. Kruck, and M. S. Magnusson, “The Courtship Dance: Patterns of Nonverbal Synchronization in Opposite‐Sex Encounters,” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 22, no. 1 (1998): 3–29, https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022986608835.
N. Ota, M. Gahr, and M. Soma, “Couples Showing Off: Audience Promotes Both Male and Female Multimodal Courtship Display in a Songbird,” Science Advances 4, no. 10 (2017): eaat4779, http://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/sciadv.aat4779.
J. G. Pfaus, A. Safron, and E. Zakreski, “From Distal to Proximal to Interactive: Behavioral and Brain Synchrony During Attraction, Courtship, and Sexual Interaction—Implications for Clinical Assessments of Relationship Style and Quality,” Sexual Medicine Reviews 11, no. 4 (2023): 312–322, https://doi.org/10.1093/sxmrev/qead034.
N. H. Prior, E. Smith, R. J. Dooling, and G. F. Ball, “Familiarity Enhances Moment‐to‐Moment Behavioral Coordination in Zebra Finch (Taeniopygia guttata) Dyads,” Journal of Comparative Psychology (Washington, DC: 1983) 134, no. 2 (2020): 135–148, https://doi.org/10.1037/com0000201.
T. S. Roth, I. Samara, J. Tan, E. Prochazkova, and M. E. Kret, “A Comparative Framework of Inter‐Individual Coordination and Pair‐Bonding,” Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 39 (2021): 98–105, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.03.005.
M. Soma, M. Iwama, R. Nakajima, and R. Endo, “Early‐Life Lessons of the Courtship Dance in a Dance‐Duetting Songbird, the Java Sparrow,” Royal Society Open Science 6, no. 6 (2019): 190563, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.190563.
M. Ihle, B. Kempenaers, and W. Forstmeier, “Fitness Benefits of Mate Choice for Compatibility in a Socially Monogamous Species,” PLoS Biology 13, no. 9 (2015): e1002248, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002248.
T. R. Spoon, J. R. Millam, and D. H. Owings, “The Importance of Mate Behavioural Compatibility in Parenting and Reproductive Success by Cockatiels, Nymphicus hollandicus,” Animal Behaviour 71, no. 2 (2006): 315–326, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.03.034.
N. S. Clayton and E. Pröve, “Song Discrimination in Female Zebra Finches and Bengalese Finches,” Animal Behaviour 38, no. 2 (1989): 352–354, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003‐3472(89)80096‐X.
R. A. Zann The Zebra Finch: A Synthesis of Field and Laboratory Studies (Oxford University Press, 1996).
P. B. D'Amelio, L. Trost, and A. ter Maat, “Vocal Exchanges During Pair Formation and Maintenance in the Zebra Finch (Taeniopygia guttata),” Frontiers in Zoology 14, no. 1 (2017): 13, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12983‐017‐0197‐x.
J. E. Elie, M. M. Mariette, H. A. Soula, S. C. Griffith, N. Mathevon, and C. Vignal, “Vocal Communication at the Nest Between Mates in Wild Zebra Finches: A Private Vocal Duet?,” Animal Behaviour 80, no. 4 (2010): 597–605, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2010.06.003.
J. E. Elie and F. E. Theunissen, “The Vocal Repertoire of the Domesticated Zebra Finch: A Data‐Driven Approach to Decipher the Information‐Bearing Acoustic Features of Communication Signals,” Animal Cognition 19, no. 2 (2016): 285–315, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071‐015‐0933‐6.
N. H. Prior, E. Smith, R. J. Dooling, and G. F. Ball, “Monogamy in a Moment: How Do Brief Social Interactions Change over Time in Pair‐Bonded Zebra Finches (Taeniopygia guttata)?,” Integrative Organismal Biology 2, no. 1 (2020): obaa034, https://doi.org/10.1093/iob/obaa034.
N. H. Prior, “What's in a Moment: What Can Be Learned about Pair Bonding From Studying Moment‐to‐Moment Behavioral Synchrony between Partners?,” Frontiers in Psychology 11 (2020): 1370, https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01370.
J. H. Bruno, E. D. Jarvis, M. Liberman, and O. Tchernichovski, “Birdsong Learning and Culture: Analogies With Human Spoken Language,” Annual Review of Linguistics 7 (2021): 449–472, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev‐linguistics‐090420‐121034.
S. C. Woolley and A. J. Doupe, “Social Context–Induced Song Variation Affects Female Behavior and Gene Expression,” PLoS Biology 6, no. 3 (2008): e62, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0060062.
Y. Chen, O. Clark, and S. C. Woolley, “Courtship Song Preferences in Female Zebra Finches Are Shaped by Developmental Auditory Experience,” Proceedings of the Royal Society 284, no. 1855 (2017): 20170054, https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2017.0054.
H. E. Schubloom and S. C. Woolley, “Variation in Social Relationships Relates to Song Preferences and EGR1 Expression in a Female Songbird,” Developmental Neurobiology 76, no. 9 (2015): 1029–1040, https://doi.org/10.1002/dneu.22373.
L. F. Gill, W. Goymann, A. Ter Maat, and M. Gahr, “Patterns of Call Communication Between Group‐Housed Zebra Finches Change During the Breeding Cycle,” Elife 4 (2015): e07770, https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.07770.
E. C. Perez, J. E. Elie, C. O. Soulage, H. A. Soula, N. Mathevon, and C. Vignal, “The Acoustic Expression of Stress in a Songbird: Does Corticosterone Drive Isolation‐Induced Modifications of Zebra Finch Calls?,” Hormones and Behavior 61, no. 4 (2012): 573–581, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2012.02.004.
H. Wickham, M. Averick, J. Bryan, et al., “Welcome to the Tidyverse,” Journal of Open Source Software 4, no. 43 (2019): 1686, https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01686.
D. Bates, M. Mächler, B. Bolker, and S. Walker, “Fitting Linear Mixed‐Effects Models Using lme4,” Journal of Statistical Software 67 (2015): 1–48, https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01.
R. V. Lenth (2025). emmeans: Estimated Marginal Means, aka Least‐Squares Means (Version R Package Version 1.11.0) [Computer Software], https://github.com/rvlenth/emmeans.
J. I. Benichov, E. Globerson, and O. Tchernichovski, “Finding the Beat: From Socially Coordinated Vocalizations in Songbirds to Rhythmic Entrainment in Humans,” Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 10 (2016): 255, https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2016.00255.
I. C. A. Boucaud, E. C. Perez, L. S. Ramos, S. C. Griffith, and C. Vignal, “Acoustic Communication in Zebra Finches Signals When Mates Will Take Turns With Parental Duties,” Behavioral Ecology 28, no. 3 (2017): 645–656, https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arw189.
I. C. A. Boucaud, M. L. N. Aguirre Smith, P. A. Valère, and C. Vignal, “Incubating Females Signal Their Needs During Intrapair Vocal Communication at the Nest: A Feeding Experiment in Great Tits,” Animal Behaviour 122 (2016): 77–86, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2016.09.021.
A. S. Villain, M. S. A. Fernandez, C. Bouchut, H. A. Soula, and C. Vignal, “Songbird Mates Change Their Call Structure and Intrapair Communication at the Nest in Response to Environmental Noise,” Animal Behaviour 116 (2016): 113–129, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2016.03.009.
S. C. Griffith, “Cooperation and Coordination in Socially Monogamous Birds: Moving Away from a Focus on Sexual Conflict,” Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 7 (2019): 455, https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2019.00455.
H. Loning, S. C. Griffith, and M. Naguib, “The Ecology of Zebra Finch Song and Its Implications for Vocal Communication in Multi‐Level Societies,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 379 (2024): 20230191, https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2023.0191.
H. Loning, S. C. Griffith, and M. Naguib, “Zebra Finch Song Is a Very Short‐Range Signal in the Wild: Evidence From an Integrated Approach,” Behavioral Ecology 33, no. 1 (2022): 37–46, https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arab107.
R. A. Fox and J. R. Millam, “Personality Traits of Pair Members Predict Pair Compatibility and Reproductive Success in a Socially Monogamous Parrot Breeding in Captivity,” Zoo Biology 33, no. 3 (2014): 166–172, https://doi.org/10.1002/zoo.21121.
W. W. Anderson, Y.‐K. Kim, and P. A. Gowaty, “Experimental Constraints on Mate Preferences in Drosophila pseudoobscura Decrease Offspring Viability and Fitness of Mated Pairs,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104, no. 11 (2007): 4484–4488, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0611152104.
H. B. Brandl, S. C. Griffith, D. R. Farine, and W. Schuett, “Wild Zebra Finches That Nest Synchronously Have Long‐Term Stable Social Ties,” Journal of Animal Ecology 90, no. 1 (2021): 76–86, https://doi.org/10.1111/1365‐2656.13082.
P. A. Gowaty, L. C. Drickamer, and S. Schmid‐Holmes, “Male House Mice Produce Fewer Offspring With Lower Viability and Poorer Performance When Mated With Females They Do Not Prefer,” Animal Behaviour 65, no. 1 (2003): 95–103, https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2002.2026.
G. L. Patricelli and E. A. Hebets, “New Dimensions in Animal Communication: The Case for Complexity,” Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 12 (2016): 80–89, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2016.09.011.
D. Gil, G. Leboucher, A. Lacroix, R. Cue, and M. Kreutzer, “Female Canaries Produce Eggs With Greater Amounts of Testosterone When Exposed to Preferred Male Song,” Hormones and Behavior 45, no. 1 (2004): 64–70, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2003.08.005.
G. Leboucher, V. Depraz, M. Kreutzer, and L. Nagle, “Male Song Stimulation of Female Reproduction in Canaries: Features Relevant to Sexual Displays Are Not Relevant to Nest‐Building or Egg‐Laying,” ethol 104, no. 7 (1998): 613–624, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439‐0310.1998.tb00096.x.
M. Monbureau, J. M. Barker, G. Leboucher, and J. Balthazart, “Male Song Quality Modulates c‐Fos Expression in the Auditory Forebrain of the Female Canary,” Physiology & Behavior 147 (2015): 7–15, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2015.04.005.
A. L. O'loghlen and M. D. Beecher, “Sexual Preferences for Mate Song Types in Female Song Sparrows,” Animal Behaviour 53, no. 4 (1997): 835–841, https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1996.0348.
S. W. Coleman, G. L. Patricelli, and G. Borgia, “Variable Female Preferences Drive Complex Male Displays,” Nature 428, no. 6984 (2004): 742–745, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02419.
G. L. Patricelli, S. W. Coleman, and G. Borgia, “Male Satin Bowerbirds, Ptilonorhynchus violaceus, Adjust Their Display Intensity in Response to Female Startling: An Experiment With Robotic Females,” Animal Behaviour 71, no. 1 (2006): 49–59, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.03.029.
G. L. Patricelli, J. A. C. Uy, G. Walsh, and G. Borgia, “Male Displays Adjusted to Female's Response,” Nature 415, no. 6869 (2002): 279–280, https://doi.org/10.1038/415279a.
S. S. Snow, G. L. Patricelli, C. T. Butts, et al., “Fighting Isn't Sexy in Lekking Greater Sage‐Grouse: A Relational Event Model Approach for Mating Interactions,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 292, no. 2047 (2025): 20242981, https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2024.2981.
N. Burley and C. B. Coopersmith, “Bill Color Preferences of Zebra Finches,” ethol 76, no. 2 (1987): 133–151, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439‐0310.1987.tb00679.x.
C. R. Dahlin and L. Benedict, “Angry Birds Need Not Apply: A Perspective on the Flexible Form and Multifunctionality of Avian Vocal Duets,” ethol 120, no. 1 (2014): 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1111/eth.12182.
N. Ota, M. Gahr, and M. Soma, “Tap Dancing Birds: The Multimodal Mutual Courtship Display of Males and Females in a Socially Monogamous Songbird,” Scientific Reports 5, no. 1 (2015): 16614, https://doi.org/10.1038/srep16614.
Contributed Indexing:
Keywords: avian; signaler–receiver model of communication; stack call; systems model of communication; tet call
Entry Date(s):
Date Created: 20260312 Date Completed: 20260312 Latest Revision: 20260312
Update Code:
20260312
DOI:
10.1111/nyas.70216
PMID:
41817469
Database:
MEDLINE
*Further Information*
*Courtship is often viewed as a linear process where males display and female assessment of this display shapes her mating decisions. However, communication can be far more dynamic and interactive, particularly in species that develop long-term relationships. Interactional complexity is not well captured by traditional models of animal communication. Here, we tested whether interactional elements shape female preferences in the monogamous zebra finch. We used selective calling as a measure of female preference. First, we asked whether females' most-preferred song (based on passive song playback) matched her most-preferred male (based on a live interaction). We found a mismatch in the preferences for song versus live males, and female preferences for a live male did not appear to be linked to how much he sang. Next, to experimentally manipulate male responsiveness, we habituated females to the song of their most-preferred or least-preferred male. This song habituation caused females to change their preferences differently depending on whether they were habituated to their most- or least-preferred male. Together, these results highlight that additional interactional elements, beyond male song, impact female social preferences. More broadly, our results contribute to growing evidence that models of communication should incorporate interactional and distributed elements.
(© 2026 The New York Academy of Sciences.)*