Âé¶¹ÒùÔº


Birdsong patterns appear to follow Zipf's law of abbreviation—just like human speech

tanager singing
Credit: Pixabay/CC0 Public Domain

Scientists have uncovered a hidden pattern in birdsong that mirrors a core rule of human language. The new study, led by researchers at The University of Manchester, in collaboration with Chester Zoo, found that birds appear to follow Zipf's law of abbreviation (ZLA)—the idea that more frequently used sounds tend to be shorter. This rule, found in all human languages, helps make communication more efficient.

The findings, in the journal PLOS Computational Biology today, offer new insight into how animals communicate and provide a new foundation for researchers exploring whether birds, like humans, shape their vocal signals according to the "principle of least effort."

Lead author Dr. Tucker Gilman, senior lecturer at the University of Manchester said, "In human language, if we say something a lot, we tend to shorten it—like saying 'TV' instead of 'television.' It turns out that the same pattern exists in .

"We know that birds and humans share similarities in the genes and brain structures involved in learning to communicate, but this is the first time we've been able to detect a consistent pattern of ZLA across multiple . There's still a lot more work to be done, but this is an exciting development."

Although previous studies hinted that animal communication might follow ZLA—including in penguins—it has been difficult to find clear evidence of ZLA in birdsong. That's partly because most birds have much smaller repertoires compared to humans. While humans use thousands of words, birds may only produce a few dozen distinct sounds.

Birdsong patterns appear to follow Zipf's law of abbreviation—just like human speech
Concordances between phrase type durations and frequencies of use in 11 bird populations. Credit: PLOS Computational Biology (2025). DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1013228

To tackle this, the researchers developed a new method for studying ZLA in birdsong that focuses on how often individual birds use certain note types and how long those notes last, allowing them to examine communication at an individual rather than .

They then applied this method using a new computational tool called ZLAvian, which compares real-world observed patterns to simulated ones to determine if ZLA is present.

Using ZLAvian, the team analyzed more than 600 songs from 11 bird populations spanning seven different species. They found that while individual populations didn't always show clear signs of ZLA, a stronger pattern emerged when the data was combined, showing more frequently used birdsong phrases were shorter on average.

Co-author Dr. Rebecca Lewis, Conservation Scientist at Chester Zoo, said, "Studying ZLA in birdsong is far more complex than in human language. Birds often have very few note types, individuals even within the same species can vary widely in their repertoires, and classifying notes is tricky too.

"Our research has taught us that it's important to look across a wide range of species when looking for language patterns, and we hope ZLAvian will make it easier for other researchers to explore these patterns in more birds but also other animals in the future."

The team says that further studies are needed across a broader set of bird species to confirm their findings.

More information: R. Tucker Gilman et al, Does Zipf's law of abbreviation shape birdsong?, PLOS Computational Biology (2025).

Journal information: PLoS Computational Biology

Citation: Birdsong patterns appear to follow Zipf's law of abbreviation—just like human speech (2025, August 14) retrieved 14 August 2025 from /news/2025-08-birdsong-patterns-zipf-law-abbreviation.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.

Explore further

Whalesong patterns follow a universal law of human language, new research finds

1 shares

Feedback to editors