This file was generated on March 6, 2020 by Jessie C. Tanner ------------------- GENERAL INFORMATION ------------------- 1. Title of Dataset: Data for: Inconsistent sexual signaling degrades optimal mating decisions in animals 2. Author Information Principal Investigator Contact Information Name: Jessie C. Tanner Institution: University of Minnesota Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior Current Address (as of March 2020): University of Western Australia School of Biological Sciences Email: jessie.c.tanner@gmail.com ORCID: 0000-0002-7047-7256 Associate or Co-investigator Contact Information Name: Mark A. Bee Institution: University of Minnesota Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior Email: mbee@umn.edu ORCID: 0000-0002-6770-9730 3. Date of data collection: May, June, and July in 2015, 2016, and 2017 4. Geographic location of data collection: University of Minnesota Saint Paul campus 5. Information about funding sources that supported the collection of the data: This work was supported by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship under Grant No. 00039202, a Ford Foundation Pre-Doctoral Fellowship, an Animal Behavior Society Student Research Grant, and a Joyce Davenport Fellowship in Natural History through the Bell Museum of Natural History to J.T. and by a National Science Foundation Grant (IOS-1452831) to M.B. -------------------------- SHARING/ACCESS INFORMATION -------------------------- 1. Licenses/restrictions placed on the data: N/A Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 United States (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/us/) 2. Publications that cite or use the data: Inconsistent sexual signaling degrades optimal mating decisions in animals. In press. Science Advances. DOI to be added when assigned 3. Links to other publicly accessible locations of the data: N/A 4. Links/relationships to ancillary data sets: N/A 5. Was data derived from another source? No 6. Recommended citation for the data: Tanner, Jessie C; Bee, Mark A. (2020). Data for: Inconsistent sexual signaling degrades optimal mating decisions in animals. Retrieved from the Data Repository for the University of Minnesota, https://doi.org/10.13020/d8f8-qh03. --------------------- DATA & FILE OVERVIEW --------------------- 1. File List A. Filename: Hch_SIN_CR_data_complete Short description: This spreadsheet contains the complete dataset (in long format) from phonotaxis tests in which the authors experimentally manipulated the following independent variables: the level of within-individual variation in call rate in male Cope’s gray treefrog calls, the level of ambient noise during the phonotaxis test, and the mean call rate of the alternative stimulus. In phonotaxis tests, subjects (female treefrogs) discriminated between two stimuli. In each test, we recorded the following measures of female responses: the binary choice made by the subject and the associated response latency. Individual treefrogs were tested in more than one test; the unique alphanumeric code in the “ID” column specifies which treefrog contributed the test represented by a single row of the dataset. This readme text is intended as a companion to the methods presented in the publication and we refer readers there for more complete information. 2. Relationship between files: N/A 3. Additional related data collected that was not included in the current data package: N/A 4. Are there multiple versions of the dataset? No -------------------------- METHODOLOGICAL INFORMATION -------------------------- 1. Description of methods used for collection/generation of data: A full description of the methods can be found in the associated publication. 2. Methods for processing the data: A full description of the methods can be found in the associated publication and we refer users there for details. Latencies and binary choices are raw data that represent direct observations of the animals. For each test, the response latency was used to calculate the mean and coefficient of variation in call rate for the portion of the stimulus the female was exposed to during the trial (i.e., by excluding the stimulus calls that did not play prior to her decision). Raw choice and latency data were used as response variables in statistical analysis, while loess-smoothed data were used to generate three-dimensional surfaces in figures 2 and 3 of the publication. 3. Instrument- or software-specific information needed to interpret the data: N/A 4. Standards and calibration information, if appropriate: N/A 5. Environmental/experimental conditions: Ambient, treefrog chorus-shaped noise was played in some test conditions. Tests were performed in a temperature-controlled anechoic chamber at 20 degrees Celsius. 6. Describe any quality-assurance procedures performed on the data: Data were entered into a spreadsheet by one person and verified (i.e., checked for typos) by a second person. We examined the distributions of variables and checked for common sense problems (e.g., the maximum response latency must not exceed 300 s in our experimental design Ð a latency that exceeded this value would be double checked against the original, hand-written data sheets and, if it couldn’t be reconciled, thrown out). Custom MATLAB scripts were used to calculate the mean and coefficient of variation in call rate taking into account the subject’s response latency, and these values were checked by randomly selecting individual tests whose parameters we calculated by hand to verify their accuracy. Note: We calculated realized means and coefficients of variation in MATLAB. Where there were zeroes in these calculations (i.e., in some cases where signals were perfectly consistent), occasionally MATLAB introduced floating point precision artifacts that caused some values that are truly equal to 0 to be displayed as very, very small numbers instead, on the order of 10-16. These do not affect the analysis. 7. People involved with sample collection, processing, analysis and/or submission: Both authors collected the data with a research team. JCT processed and analyzed the data and submitted it to DRUM. ----------------------------------------- DATA-SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR: Hch_SIN_CR_data_complete.csv ----------------------------------------- 1. Number of variables: The dataset contains 27 variables (columns) 2. Number of cases/rows: 3,726 (635 trials in which females discriminated between two stimuli with equivalent nominal means and 3,091 trials in which females discriminated between two stimuli of different nominal means) 3. Missing data codes: N/A 4. Variable List A. ID Description: Alphanumeric identification string assigned to each individual animal. “Hch245-15” denotes the 245th frog captured in the 2015 frog season. “Hch” is a species identification string. Note that gaps in this number series occur because not every frog captured during a given year was assigned to this experiment. B. Year Description: Year (= treefrog breeding season) that the trial was completed. Possible values: 2015, 2016, 2017 C. Nominal_Inconsistency_Level Description: A word describing the nominal level of inconsistency for the trial stimuli. Each corresponds to a coefficient of variation within a stimulus. Levels: “none”, “low”, “mean”, “high” D. NominalCVw Description: A number representing the target coefficient of variation within the stimulus. Each corresponds to a level in column C. Levels: “0”, “0.105”, “0.030”, “0.050” E. Signal_Set Description: Number of the signal set assigned to each female. When the nominal coefficient of variation is not equal to 0, each female was assigned a “set” of unique audio tracks that only she experienced during phonotaxis trials (for “experimental” females, which discriminated between stimuli with different call rates: -2 vs 0, -1 vs 0, 0 vs 1, and 0 vs 2 standard deviations in call rate; for “control” females, which discriminated between stimuli with equal nominal mean call rates: 0 vs 0, with a unique stimulus for each of 4 nominal levels of inconsistency). When Signal_Set is coded as 0, that female was assigned to the condition in which the nominal coefficient of variation within signals (CVw) was equal to 0; all realizations of CVw = 0 signals were identical. Signal_Set counts up to a maximum of 53 because they were numbered within levels of inconsistency (within-individual variation; nominal CVw); thus the Signal_Set is unique within assigned levels of inconsistency but numbers are re-used across levels of inconsistency. F. Leading Description: The name of the signal that played first in a given phonotaxis trial. This was randomized between subjects. In trials in which the subject discriminated between two calls with different nominal mean call rates, possible levels are “standard” (= nominal mean call rate of 0 SD from the population mean) or “alternative”. In trials in which the subject discriminated between two calls with the same nominal mean call rates (0 vs 0 SD from the population mean), the calls were randomly and arbitrarily labeled, and the possible levels are A or B. Levels: standard alternative A B G. Standard_Speaker Description: The number of the speaker that played the “standard” (or “A”) call. This was randomized between subjects. Levels: 1 and 2 H. Chorus_Noise_File Description: The number of the chorus noise file used for playback of ambient noise in the trial. Because noise is a random realization, we replicated the noises played back and limited the number of subjects assigned to the same noise file. This variable counts up from 1 to 84. I. Num_Complete Description: The number of tests that the subject completed, between 1 and 16. Most subjects completed the full complement of tests (16). J. Finished_All_Tests Description: A binary value describing whether or not the subject completed the full complement of tests. This value is 1 if the value in column I is equal to 16 and 0 otherwise. K. CSN_Level Description: The level of ambient noise (also called “chorus shaped noise”) as a factor. Levels: “none” (= quiet), “low” (60 dB), “mean” (70 dB), “high” (80 dB) K: Ambient_Noise_Level_Numeric Description: The level of ambient noise as a number. Levels: 0 (=quiet), 60, 70, 80 L: Nominal_Alternative_Mean Description: The nominal mean call rate of the alternative stimulus measured in calls per minute. Levels: 6.6, 8.9, 11.1, 13.3, 15.5 M: Alt_in_SD Description: The nominal mean call rate of the alternative stimulus measured in standard deviations from the population mean. Levels: -2, -1, 0, 1, 2 N: Choice Description: The outcome of the phonotaxis trial as a word describing the female’s choice. In trials in which female discriminated between two alternatives with different nominal mean call rates, the possible values are “standard” and “alternative”. In trials in which females discriminated between two alternatives with equivalent nominal mean call rates, the possible values are “A” and “B”. O: Choice_Binary Description: The outcome of the phonotaxis trial as a binary (0 or 1) value. In trials in which the female discriminated between two alternatives with different nominal mean call rates, a choice for the alternative is coded as 1, whereas a choice of the standard is coded as 0. In trials in which females discriminated between two alternatives with equivalent nominal mean call rates, a choice of the B stimulus is coded as 1, whereas a choice of the A stimulus is coded as 0. P: Latency_s Description: The subject’s response latency in seconds, with a maximum value of 300. Q: Num_Alt_Calls_Experienced Description: This variable describes the number of calls in the alternative stimulus that were played during the trial, and thus, also the number of calls from the stimulus that were used to calculate the realized mean call rate and realized CVw. R: Realized_Alternative_Mean Description: The realized mean call rate of the alternative stimulus. When the stimulus was perfectly consistent, this value will be the same as in column J; otherwise, it will differ. S: Realized_Alternative_SD Description: The standard deviation of the call rate of the alternative stimulus. Calculated in order to determine the realized CVw. T: Realized_Alternative_CVw Description: The realized coefficient of variation within (CVw) the alternative stimulus. Perfectly consistent signals have a CVw of 0. U: Num_Std_Calls_Experienced Description: This variable describes the number of calls in the standard stimulus that were played during the trial, and thus, also the number of calls from the stimulus that were used to calculate the realized mean call rate and realized CVw. V: Realized_Standard_Mean Description: The realized mean call rate of the standard stimulus. W: Realized_Standard_SD Description: The standard deviation of the call rate of the standard stimulus. Calculated in order to determine the realized CVw. X: Realized_Standard_CVw Description: The realized coefficient of variation within (CVw) the alternative stimulus. Perfectly consistent signals have a CVw of 0. Y: Alt.Std_Difference_CVw Description: The difference in CVw between the alternative and standard stimuli, calculated by subtracting the standard CVw from the alternative CVw. Z: PChoseFaster Description: A binary value describing the probability that a female chose the stimulus with the faster call rate, based on the realized mean call rates of both alternatives. This value is 1 if the female chose the faster realized mean call rate and 0 if the female chose the slower realized mean call rate. AA: AverageCVw Description: The arithmetic mean of the realized coefficient of variation within (CVw) calculated for the alternative and standard stimuli in the trial.