Figure 4: Response of mule deer females to natural mule deer distress calls, synthesized mule deer distress calls and sine wave stimuli.

We (Tobias Riede and Susan Lingle) modeled synthesized mule deer (MD) distress calls using parameters measured from natural distress calls (described in publication). We created sine wave stimuli that had the same mean F0 as the natural and synthesized distress calls. The sine wave stimuli had no additional harmonics and were longer (5 s in length). These stimuli were played to mule deer mothers in the field in summer 2013. Data were collected by video and audio-recording female responses. Data were transcribed from video and audio and entered into an excel spreadsheet.

Data columns represent:

Column A: Type of call = Natural MD (mule deer), Synthesized MD or Sine MD
Column B: Specific call refers to the individual producing the call or upon which the stimulus was prepared.
Column C: Mean fundamental frequency (mean F0) for the sound stimulus.
Column D: Distance between female and speaker at the start of the trial.
Column E: Closest distance the female came to the speaker, for females that approached the speaker (na or not applicable if a female did not approach).
Column F: Basic response of female. Possibilities include: Retreat; No response; Intermittent alert, Continual alert, Approach.
Column G: Female’s ehaviour close to speaker. If a female approached within 10 m of the speaker, did she remain within that distance for at least 10 s? Yes (y), No, or na (not applicable).
Column H: Mule deer response coded. The number is based on the general response, the distance to which the female approached, and whether she remained close to the speaker if she came within 10 m. See corresponding publication for details.