Diurnal Calling in a Nocturnal Frog: Exceptional Calling Activity of Túngara Frogs (Engystomops pustulosus) on the Panamanian Island of Taboga
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Túngara Frogs, Engystomops pustulosus, are known to reduce the complexity of their calls in the presence of predators. Although complex calls are more attractive to females, they also attract predators, particularly frog-eating bats, and are rarely emitted by solitary males. Therefore, if Túngara Frogs were to be released from predation pressure, as on the island of Taboga in the Gulf of Panama where frog-eating bats are absent, such constraints on calling should be alleviated. We compared the calling behavior of Túngara Frogs on Taboga with the calling behavior of those on Barro Colorado Island, located in central Panama where frog-eating bats are present, using timed video recordings. Compared with Túngara Frogs on Barro Colorado Island, male Túngara Frogs on Taboga called more, emitted consistently more calls in choruses, and called both day and night. On Taboga, even solitary males routinely embellished their calls with chuck elements. These results are consistent with a hypothesis of predator release positively affecting calling behavior.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".