Available via license: CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
B I O D I V E R S I T A S
ISSN: 1412-033X
Volume 22, Number 5, May 2021 E-ISSN: 2085-4722
Pages: 2451-2457 DOI: 10.13057/biodiv/d220501
Crowing sound and inbreeding coefficient analysis of Pelung chicken
(Gallus gallus domesticus)
BUDI S. DARYONO1,, MIFTAHUL MUSHLIH2, AYUDHA BAHANA ILHAM PERDAMAIAN1
1Laboratory of Genetics and Breeding, Faculty of Biology, Universitas Gadjah Mada. Jl. Teknika Selatan, Sleman 55281, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
Tel.: +62-274-580839, Fax.: +62-274-6492355, email: bs_daryono@mail.ugm.ac.id
2Laboratory of Molecular Biology, Faculty of Health Science, Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo. Jl. Raya Lebo No. 4, Rame Pilang, Wonoayu,
Sidoarjo 61261, East Java, Indonesia
Manuscript received: 15 November 2020. Revision accepted: 2 April 2021.
Abstract. Daryono BS, Mushlih M, Perdamaian ABI. 2021. Crowing sound and inbreeding coefficient analysis of Pelung chicken
(Gallus gallus domesticus). Biodiversitas 22: 2451-2457. Pelung is one of the crowing-typed chickens from Indonesia. The bioacoustics
characters of Indonesian crowing-typed chicken especially Pelung chicken were less documented. This study aimed to characterize
crowing sound and to study the inbreeding coefficient of the Pelung chicken. In this study, crowing voice of 77 male Pelung chicken
was recorded. Bioacoustics analyses of crowing voice were done using Adobe Audition CS5.5 and PRAAT 5.3.66 software. The results
showed that chicken crowing consisted of front sound (first syllable), middle sound (second syllable) and end sound (third syllable).
Each section of Pelung crowing had specific characteristics compared to other chicken breeds and varied among champions and non-
champions. Champion chicken had slowed and clear first and second syllable, sound energy was lower in first syllable then decrease at
second syllable and has bitu gantung third syllable. Crowing duration and fundamental frequency (F0) of champion and non-champion
were not statically different. The inbreeding coefficient reached 0.53 in several Pelung champions. Based on the research findings,
bioacoustics software was applicable to assist the chicken show.
Keywords: Bioacoustics, crowing characteristic, Indonesian crowing-typed chicken, Pelung chicken
INTRODUCTION
In Indonesia, 28 local chicken breeds had identified and
documented. Each breed has a morphological identifier and
different potentials (Ulfah et al. 2016). Among Indonesian
chicken breeds, four breeds have the ability in producing a
distinctive crowing sound so-called a singer chicken.
Singer chicken can produce a melodious sound, as well as
rhythm but varying in character (Ulfah et al. 2017). These
four breeds categorized as singer chicken were Kokok
balenggek chicken from West Sumatra, Bekisar chicken
from East Java, Gaga chicken from southern Sulawesi, and
Pelung chicken from Cianjur District, West Java Province
(Daryono et al. 2020). Three of them (Gaga, Kokok
balenggek, Pelung, respectively) have been patented as
genetic treasurer of Indonesia in 2011 by Indonesian
Ministry of Agriculture. In this research, the authors
attempt to describe these four chicken breeds.
In this research, the authors deeply concentrate on
Pelung chicken. At glance, Pelung chicken has a large
body compared with the other local Indonesian chickens.
Adult females have an average weight of 4,500 gr while the
male has 5.400 gr (Asmara1 et al. 2020; Asmara2 et al.
2020). The other local chicken breed weight was just
approximately 1,500 to 1,800 gr for adult males and 1,000
to1,400 gr for females. However, for Pelung chicken
enthusiasts, Pelung chicken usually maintained if it has a
good voice or has potential for competition, while Pelung
chicken with regular voice is usually sold to a market or
used as a source of food. Pelung chicken mating usually
well documented so the pedigree was clear. Chicken with
the same predecessor grouped as the same clan (trah)
which determines the chicken price. For example, trah
Lembayung and trah Gerandong which had approximately
eight times winning records were expensive than the
others. Closely related mating makes the inbreeding
coefficient arguably high.
Pelung has a distinctive crowing voice (called: melung)
with a characteristic sound that long, undulating, loud and
rhythmic. For beginner readers, the sound of Pelung
chicken crowing was like common chicken but much
longer with a prolonged end. Pelung chicken singing
competition often held by several agencies. One of them by
the district government held regularly to preserve the
existence of Pelung chicken. The winner of each chicken
show was determined by a group of judges which consisted
of three to four persons with one leader. Subjectivity might
occur during the examination. On this occasion, the authors
were compiling the chicken voice recordings from different
champions to make a standardization.
Vocalization was important character for identification
which had been studied in Toad (Wang et al. 2019) and
Liocichla (Kong et al. 2020). This research aimed to study
the bioacoustics character and study the inbreeding
coefficient of Pelung chicken.
B I O D I V E R S I T A S
22 (5): 2451-2457, May 2021
2452
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The study was done in 2018 in Cianjur, West Java,
Indonesia as the central development of Pelung chicken. 77
male Pelung chicken were used in this research.
Bioacoustics analysis
Pelung chicken crowing sound data retrieval by purpose
ve sampling method using a voice recorder, by using a set
of digital voice recording (SONY ICD-UX533F). The
crowing of each chicken was done by 1 to 5 repetitions
(minimum) or to obtain an optimal sound. Form these
repetitions, the crowing voice used in this research was
based on the opinions of the expert. The crowing voice
used in this research was the best that can be produced by
the sample. The distance of recording approximately 500
cm from the object. Recorded sound stored in the ".wav"
form, then analyzed with Adobe Audition CS5.5 and
PRAAT 5.3.66 software. The parameters used in this study
are presented in Table 1. Voice was transformed into a
waveform and spectrogram to show the voice pattern. The
waveform can be a representation of the voice graph.
Formant is a spectrum of peak waves to another peak wave.
To at least three formants (F1, F2, F3) (Jenny 2013).
Statistical analysis was done by the T-independent test and
ANOVA.
Champion sound analysis
In this research, the authors attempt to analyze the
champion sound characters. Pelung chicken divided into
two bioacoustics analyses, chicken with winning record
were grouped as champion while others grouped as non-
champion.
Inbreeding coefficient analysis
Pedigree construction was done by interview at least
two reliable breeders. inbreeding coefficient calculated
using the standard formula (Frankham et al. 2002).
Where; F was the Inbreeding Coefficient (IC) and n was
the number of lines of mating.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Chicken crowing bioacoustics
Indonesia has three natural chicken breeds (Kokok
balenggek, Gaga, Pelung, respectively) and one hybrid
chicken breed (Bekisar) which especially breed to sing
(Rusfidra and Arlina 2014). In this research, we managed
to describe them. The different chicken breeds might
produce various sound characters in each part. Dwarf
chicken (Ayam Kate) and Crested chicken Ayam Mahkota)
have the same crowing voice parts compared to Pelung
chicken but different in duration (Figure 1).
Pelung chicken crowing duration reached 8.435 ± 1.647
seconds while Crested and Dwarf chicken only 1.975 ±
0.2252 seconds and 1.772 ± 0.2698 seconds. Pelung
chicken crowing duration more than four times longer than
a dwarf and a crested chicken.
Table 1. Pelung chicken crowing sound parameters
Parameter
Definition
Crowing duration
Entire crowing vocalization
F0 syllable (Pitch)
Average F0 at first syllable
Min. F0 syllable
F0 (pitch)* minimum at first syllable
Max. F0 syllable
F0 (pitch)* maximum at first syllable
First syllable duration
Entire first syllable
Element duration
First syllable element duration
Silent interval
Silent duration between element and first syllable
Second syllable duration
Entire second syllable vocalization
Third syllable duration
Entire third syllable vocalization
F0 mean
The average of F0 (pitch) at entire crowing vocalization
F0 min
F0 (pitch) minimal at entire crowing vocalization
F0 max
F0 (pitch) maximal at entire crowing vocalization
F0 second wave
The average of F0 (Pitch) at second syllable
F1 mean
The average of Formant -1 at entire crowing vocalization
F1 second syllable
The average of Formant -1 at second syllable
F2 mean
The average of Formant -2 at entire crowing vocalization
F2 second syllable
The average of Formant -2 at second syllable
F3 mean
The average of Formant -3 at entire crowing vocalization
F3 second syllable
The average of Formant -3 at second syllable
The amplitude of element
Amplitude/energy element at first syllable
The amplitude of first syllable
Amplitude/energy at first wave/syllable
The amplitude of second syllable
Amplitude/energy at second wave/syllable
The amplitude of third syllable
Amplitude/energy at third wave/syllable
DARYONO et al. – Crowing sound and inbreeding coefficient analysis of pelung chicken
2453
Crowing sound consists of 1.104 ± 0.210 seconds first
syllable, 5.532 ± 1.274 seconds second syllable, and 1.858
± 0.969 third syllable. The first syllable (first wave) is the
sound that started the sequence of crow. The first element
consists of one element and first syllable which joined in
the beginning of crowing sound. Between element and
syllable separated with silent interval. At the beginning of
Pelung chicken crow, the element is a short wave bite that
has a length of 0.1973 ± 0.059 sec. Element and early
sound syllables separated by a pause of about 0.1213 ±
0.038 seconds.
Based on the analysis, the first syllable has an F0
(fundamental frequency) around 243.875 ± 64.260 Hz, the
minimum F0 188.43 ± 66.119 Hz, and a maximum F0
295.37 ± 81.972 Hz. The crowing style followed a pattern
similar to syllable earlier, namely forming sound "ku - ku"
and then followed down the volume rises with the style
called initial syllable. First syllable length 0.7924 ± 0.20
seconds. The length of the initial syllable around 1.1128 ±
0.218 seconds.
In terms of amplitude, significant difference was
noticed among the syllables. The average of energy
produced by Pelung chicken is 83.237 ± 1.780 dB. Pelung
chicken will emit a loud sound at the beginning syllable
that the syllable "ku" (element component). The results
showed that “ku” voice has 84.849 ± 1.758 dB amplitude
then decreases to 83.648 ± 1.061 dB when reaching the
initial syllable early after the silent syllable. When it
reaches the middle syllable, amplitude decreased again to
83.174 ± 0.754 dB. However, the decrease was
significantly different at P>0.01. off all observed Pelung
crowing, the Standard deviation (SD) of the amplitude of
the middle voice has the lowest value compared to other
voice parts, this means that the sound is constant in this
section. The second syllable was the beautiful part of the
Pelung crowing.
In the end, syllable decreased to 81 279 ± 1,152 dB.
Sound energy at the end tends to have higher than syllable
beginning and middle, but not higher when compared with
the element at the first syllable. The Standard deviation
value demonstrated a high-end control syllable was very
different in individuals.
The bioacoustics of the Pelung champion
To analyze the champion characters, the authors
investigate the crowing sound structure of 1st winner
(champion) from several chicken shows. The limitation of
this study was high variability of crowing sound (Figure 2).
In different city, most of the chicken show contestant and
champion was different. The subjectivity of judgment
might occur. Five components were used to select a
champion consisted of first syllable, second syllable, third
syllable, rhythm, and harmony.
Based on voice visualization, each champion produces
a similar crowing pattern. The first syllable must be slow
rhythmic and clearly heard. “Ku-ku” and followed by
“ellu” sound must be harmonic. The second syllable must
be slow, “ke-ke…ellu..” then form an increasing sound
(bitu gantung) along with “ell” sound. the L sound at bitu
should be clearly heard at “elllLLLUuuu”. Decrease F0 but
increase the amplitude. However, the type of bitu will be
described in another paper (Daryono et al. 2020). Based on
our analysis, the crowing duration does not determine the
quality of crowing. Crowing duration of champion and
non-champion were not statically different.
The comparison of crowing energy between champion
(having win record) to non-champion attempts to analyze
the sound hardness (Figure 3). In terms of sound energy, in
this occasion, the authors use “kekelur” typed crowing for
example as champion and “kukulir” typed crowing for
example as non-champion. “Kululir” was a very ordinary
Pelung crowing type, and always not selected to follow a
chicken show.
The champion (kekelur) produced lower sound energy
than the common Pelung chicken (kukulir) at the first
syllable’s element. Then sound energy was noticed decreased
at second syllable in both groups, this downstream was
significant at the champion but not at common Pelung. At
the third syllable, the champion produces lower sound
energy than the common Pelung. At the third syllable, the
ability to control the sound energy to produce long and
decreasing crowing was the champion criteria.
Fundamental frequency (F0) and formant are important
factors in bioacoustics (Figure 4). The result of the
calculation cannot be used before transformed into In or
log10 function (Flynn and Foulkes 2011). Based on our
analysis, the fundamental frequency was not different
between champion and non-champion (p > 0.01). Whereas
among champions in Semarang chicken show, the
fundamental frequency was not uniform.
Figure 1. The comparison of first syllable (A), second syllable
(B), and end syllable (C) divided by vertical blue lines crowing
voice parts duration of Dwarf chicken (1), Pelung (2), and Crested
chicken (3)
B I O D I V E R S I T A S
22 (5): 2451-2457, May 2021
2454
Based on our visualization, F0 were highly
polymorphic. F0 cannot used as a bioacoustics marker.
Contrary, the value of Formant 2 (F2), F2-F1, F3, F5 were
statistically different at P<0.05 while pitch (F0), F1, F3-F2,
F4 + F2, and F4 at P<0.01. F1, F2, F3, F4, total formant
and F4+F1 at vowel “i” and “u” used in this research to
estimate the difference between champion crowing and
usual crowing voice. The F1 and F2 of “kukulir” and
“kekelur” were different positions in the sound sequence
(Figure 5).
Figure 2. The crowing bioacoustics visualization of 1st winner
Pelung chicken in Jakarta and Bandung chicken show (A),
Surabaya chicken show (B) and Semarang chicken show (C).
Blue line indicated the bitu (intonation dynamic) sequence.
Figure 3. Energy (dB) comparison of 1st winner chicken crowing
(blue box) to typical Pelung crowing voice (red box). Superscript
AB and ab indicate statistical difference at >5% and >1%.
Figure 4. The comparison of the fundamental frequency (F0) of
1st winner (dark blue line) at Semarang chicken show compared
to 1st winner (violet line) at Jakarta and Bandung chicken show,
runner up (yellow), 10th winner (green), 17th position (red),
qualified (light blue and black).
Figure 5. The visualization of “kekelur” and “kukulir” typed sound at Formant 1 (F1) and formant 2 (F2) position. Green box and blue
box indicate the formant frequency difference (left panel). The sound sequence of "kekelur” (red line) and “kukulir” (green line) and
white dash indicate the Formant 1 (F1) and Formant 2 (F2) position (right panel)
DARYONO et al. – Crowing sound and inbreeding coefficient analysis of pelung chicken
2455
The inbreeding coefficient of champion Pelung chicken
Based on our calculation, the Inbreeding Coefficient
(IC) reached 0.53 at one champion named Khayangan.
However, Khayangan brothers were not exhibited excellent
crowing sound. Although high IC value was bad, but no
physical deterioration was commonly noticed. For
example, there was no statistical difference between
champion and non-champion body weight. When the
authors attempt to outbreed Pelung to broiler into the first
Backcrossed (BC1) population, all siblings were non-
singer. Chicken enthusiasts remember the pedigree of
Pelung chicken. In the beginning, champion Pelung
chicken named Rengket was descendent of Si Kaget which
also had first place record. Rengket mating to female which
had bloodline was produced champion chicken named
Lembayung. Lembayung was the predecessor of many
champions including Khayangan (Figure 6).
Lembayung mating to female named Rengge which not
had bloodline was produced champion chicken named
Lodaya. Kencana and Kemuning, Lodaya’s offspring also
had champion record. Having big name, Lembayung
descendent was mated to other bloodlines, i.e. Grandong,
Simega and Sidolar (pers. comm. Agus Abdurrahman).
Sibling mating was regularly practiced until produce
Khayangan. From many Khayangan offspring, only
Samhiyang (not showed in Figure 6.) had champion
criteria. Samhiyang in the learning phase (juvenile age)
ever participating in chicken contest and even selected to
the grand final.
Discussions
Chicken crowing bioacoustics
Indonesia has three natural chicken breeds (Kokok
balenggek, Gaga, Pelung, respectively) and one hybrid
chicken breed (Bekisar) which especially breed to sing
(Rusfidra and Arlina 2014). In this research, we managed
to describe them.
Figure 6. The detailed Pelung chicken pedigree shows individual
Pelung names and mating scheme
Bekisar chicken was famous in Madura Island and the
eastern part of Java Island. This hybrid chicken originated
from the mating of the female domestic chicken (Gallus
gallus domesticus) which mostly black-feathered kampung
chicken breed with male green junglefowl (Gallus varius)
(Ulfah et al. 2017). Bekicem (Bekisar cemani) was all
black-colored Bekisar produced by crossing female cemani
chicken breeds (fibromelanosis phenotype) with male green
junglefowl. Although had low fertility, crossing male
Bekisar to female domestic chicken able to produce the
first Backcrossed line (BC1) called Bekikuk. This male BC1
chicken has a similar appearance and crowing sound to
male Bekisar.
Kokok balenggek chicken breed was originated from the
Western part of Sumatra Island. Among singer-typed
chicken in Indonesia, this chicken has the highest number
of syllables which reached 24. Typical of this breed has a
5.07 syllable each crowing. Crowing consisted of front
sound, middle sound, and end sound. The uniqueness of
these breeds laid on their end voice. Kokok balenggek
chicken crowing sound has a frequency of around 8.08
times/10 minutes. The crowing duration approximately
2.03 to 4.43 seconds.
The last list of the crowing typed chicken breed, Gaga
chicken, is crowing type chicken that originated from the
south part of Sulawesi Island (Zulistiana and Abinawantoa
2018). Gaga chicken has a crowing voice reminiscent of
human laughing voice so often called as laughing chicken
(Ayam Ketawa) (Abinawanto and Effendi 2017) Gaga
chicken crowing voice consisted of three main parts, front
voice with high intonation, middle voice laughing like a
human, and sort end voice. The ending voice is the
uniqueness and determines the quality and price of Gaga
chicken (Bugiwati and Ashari 2013). Crowing duration
around 3.68 ± 1.08 seconds.
Gaga chicken can be divided into two types based on
the crowing rhythm and the amount of syllables (Effendi
and Abinawanto 2016, Abinawanto and Effendi 2018).
First, dangdut (fast rhythm typed) and common (slow
rhythm typed). Based on the amount of syllables, dangdut
can be divided again into two types, long dangdut, and
short dangdut. Long dangdut type crowing duration reaches
30.8 seconds whereas short dangdut only 4.2 seconds while
the common (slow type) around 7 seconds. The syllable
recorded from long dangdut was 143 while short dangdut
was only 21, whereas the common-typed gaga chicken was
only 8. Most various parts of Kokok balenggek, Gaga, and
Pelung chicken crowing voice occurred in the middle
voice.
Pelung chicken was originated from Cianjur, West Java
province (Asmara et al. 2020). The different chicken breeds
might produce various sound characters in each part. Dwarf
chicken (Ayam Kate) and Crested chicken (Ayam Mahkota)
have the same crowing voice parts compared to Pelung
chicken but different in duration (Figure 1).
The bioacoustics of the Pelung champion
Based on voice visualization, each champion produces
a similar crowing pattern. Crowing duration of champion
and non-champion were not statically different. The
B I O D I V E R S I T A S
22 (5): 2451-2457, May 2021
2456
comparison of crowing energy between champion (having
win record) to non-champion attempts to analyze the sound
hardness (Figure 3). the ability to control the sound energy
to produce long and decreasing crowing was the champion
criteria.
Fundamental frequency (F0) and formant are important
factors in bioacoustics (Figure 4). The result of the
calculation cannot be used before transformed into In or
log10 function (Flynn and Foulkes 2011). Based on our
analysis, the fundamental frequency was not different
between champion and non-champion (p > 0.01). Whereas
among champions in Semarang chicken show, the
fundamental frequency was not uniform.
The inbreeding coefficient of champion Pelung chicken
The folklore about Pelung chicken origin believed by
people, today Pelung chicken breed was derived from a
single male ancestor. The story said that the very first
Pelung chicken breed was male chick hatched from
common local chicken (Ayam Kampung). This chick had
bigger body appearance and late covered by feathers which
when adult produces distinctive crowing sounds. In 1850s,
Pelung chicken breed begins famous.
This study shows the breeding scheme of the making of
satisfying Pelung chicken. As described earlier, clan (trah)
and pedigree was determining the Pelung chicken price.
Believed by breeder, a clan with winning record prominent
for Pelung chicken breeding. Contrary, Kokok balenggek
breeder not precisely made pedigree for the breeding
scheme. Usually, breeder keeps their chicken free-range.
That made the inbreeding coefficient remain low. (Rusfidra
et al. 2014, Rusfidra et al. 2015).
Based on our calculation, the Inbreeding Coefficient
(IC) reached 0.88 at one champion named Khayangan.
However, Khayangan brothers were not exhibited excellent
crowing sound. Although high IC value was bad, but no
physical deterioration was commonly noticed. For
example, there was no statistical difference between
champion and non-champion body weight. Many Pelung
chicken breeders use non-commercial produced feed which
mainly comprised of paddy bran to minimize the
detrimental effect of feed additives. This decision has
consisted of other reports that evaluated the impact of
chicken commercial feed on animal and human health
(Ahmad et al. 2020).
Winning a chicken show would raise his price as well
as his progeny. Champion male mating with a female (had
closest as possible bloodline with the champion male) to
producing chicken for highly competing in the chicken
show. Chick was intensively reared for participating in
chicken show.
When the authors attempt to outbreed Pelung to broiler
into the first Backcrossed (BC1) population, all siblings
were non-singer (Utama et al. 2018). The results indicate
the recessive autosomal as the inheritance mode of long-
crowing sound traits. However, this theory was not linier to
other singer chicken breeds. Gaga and Kokok balenggek
chicken crowing ability were believed to be acquired by
learning (genetics imprinting) (Bugiwati and Asyari 2013;
Rusfidra 2007).
Each section of Pelung crowing has specific
bioacoustics characters and vary among champions and
non-champions. The inbreeding coefficient reached 0.88 in
several Pelung champions. Bioacoustics software was
applicable to assist the chicken show. Amplitude was
different among Pelung chicken. Supported by outbreeding
data, the authors propose multiple gene works responsible
for Pelung crowing trait.
Inbreeding Coefficient (IC) and bioacoustics do not
have direct correlation. However, Inbreeding mating in
Pelung farm was carried out and maintained through
generation to accumulate and preserve the ample genes
responsible for crowing. This led to higher IC at Pelung
champion clan which also increase the possibility to had
deleterious traits.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors want to acknowledge Universitas Gadjah
Mada for providing the applied technology research fund
(020/ST/KP4/DIPA/UGM/2013) and the language editing
service. The University Farm (Pusat Inovasi Agroteknologi
Terpadu; PIAT) for providing the Academic, Business,
Community, and Government (ABCG) network
development research fund (No. 031/ST/KP4/DIPA/UGM/
2013). This study was financially supported by Applied
Research grant (Penelitian Terapan/PT No.
1997/UN1.DITLIT/DIT-LIT/PT/2020) of Ministry of
Research Technology and Higher Education of Indonesia
REFERENCES
Abinawanto A, Effendi PS. 2018. The bioacoustics analysis and the
morphometrics study of the Gaga’s chicken (ayam ketawa) from
Pinrang and Kebayoran Lama. AIP Conf Proc 2023: 020137. DOI:
10.1063/1.5064134.
Ahmad S, Ahmed L, Haider S, Batool Z, Liaquat L, Ahmed F, et al. 2020.
Effects of feed additives on chicken growth and their residues in meat
instigating deleterious consequences on the liver health of consumers
- a prospective human study. Pakistan J Zool 52 (3): 909-916. DOI:
10.17582/journal.pjz/20181121161104.
Asmara IY, Garnida D, Partasasmita R. 2020. Crowing characteristics of
Pelung chickens at different age and body weights. Biodiversitas 21
(9): 4339-4344. DOI: 10.13057/biodiv/d210953.
Asmara IY, Garnida D, Partasasmita R. 2020. Duration and volume of
crowing of Pelung chickens of West Java, Indonesia. Biodiversitas 21
(2): 748-752. DOI: 10.13057/biodiv/d210242
Boersma P, Weenink D. 2005. Beginners guide to Praat.
https://person2.sol.lu.se/SidneyWood/praate/frames.html [14 August
2020]
Bugiwati SRA, Ashari F. 2013. Crowing sound analysis of Gaga’ chicken:
local chicken from South Sulawesi Indonesia. Intl J Plant Anim
Environ Sci 3 (2): 163-168.
Daryono BS, Mushlih M, Perdamaian ABI. 2020. Vocalization characters
and Forkhead Box P2 (FoxP2) polymorphism in Indonesian crowing-
type chicken (Gallus gallus domesticus). Iran J Appl Anim Sci 10 (1):
131-140.
Effendi PS, Abinawanto A. 2016. Biodiversity of the Gaga’ chicken
(Ayam Ketawa) from Sidenreng-Rappang based on the bioacoustic
analysis and the morphometric study. AIP Conf Proc 1729: 020071.
DOI: 10.1063/1.4946974.
Flynn NEJ, Foulkes P. 2011. Comparing vowel formant normalization
methods. In Lee WS, Zee E. (eds.). Proceedings of the 17th ICPhS.
City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
DARYONO et al. – Crowing sound and inbreeding coefficient analysis of pelung chicken
2457
Frankham R, Ballou JD, Briscoe DA. 2002. Introduction to Conservation
Genetics. Cambridge Univesity Press, Cambridge, UK.
Jenny. 2013. The effect of Tonsillectomy using adenoidectomy to formant
frequency [Thesis]. Faculty of Medicine, Gadjah Mada University,
Yogyakarta. [Indonesian]
Kong C, Wu Y, Lou S, Chen B, Dowell SD, Fu Y. 2020. Individual
identification based on the songs of the Emei Shan Liocichla
(Liocichla omeiensis). Pakistan J Zool 52 (2): 617-624. DOI:
10.17582/journal.pjz/20170510120508.
Rusfidra S, Marajo Dt. T, Heryandi Y, Oktaveriza B. 2014. Estimation of
Inbreeding Rate in Kokok balenggek Chicken (KBC) population
under ex-situ conservation. Intl J Poult Sci 13: 364-367. DOI:
10.3923/ijps.2014.364.367.
Rusfidra, Arlina F. 2014. A r eview of “long crower chickens” as poultry
genetic resources in Indonesia. Intl J Poult Sci 13: 665-669. DOI:
10.3923/ijps.2014.665.669.
Rusfidra, Gusrizal M, Gusrin Y, Abbas M, Husmaini H, Arlina F, et al.
2015. Flock composition, effective population size and inbreeding
rate of Kokok balenggek chicken breed under in-situ conservation. Int.
J. Poult. Sci 14: 117-119 DOI: 10.3923/ijps.2015.117.119.
Rusfidra, Tumatra YY, Abbas M H, Heryandi Y, Arlina F. 2014.
Characterization of number of crow and qualitative marker of Kokok
balenggek song fowl inside a captive breeding farm in Solok
Regency, West Sumatera Province, Indonesia. Intl J Poult Sci 13:
343-346. DOI: 10.3923/ijps.2014.343.346
Rusfidra. 2007. Bioacoustic assessment of the Belengek crown chickens
"the local sing fowl" from West Sumatra. National Seminar on
Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Technology, Balai Besar
Penelitian Veteriner, Bogor. [Indonesian]
Ulfah M, Kawahara-Miki R, Farajalllah A, Muladno M, Dorshorst B,
Martin A, Kono T. 2016. Genetic features of red and green
junglefowls and relationship with Indonesian native chickens
Sumatera and Kedu Hitam. BMC Genomics 17: 320. DOI:
10.1186/s12864-016-2652-z.
Ulfah M, Perwitasari D., Jakaria J., Muladno M., Farajallah A. 2017.
Multiple maternal origins of Indonesian crowing chickens revealed by
mitochondrial DNA analysis. Mitochondrial DNA A DNA Mapp Seq
Anal 28 (2): 254-262. DOI: 10.3109/19401736.2015.1118069.
Utama IV, Perdamaian ABI, Daryono BS. 2018. Plumage uniformity,
growth rate and growth hormone polymorphism in Indonesian hybrid
chickens. Intl J Poult Sci 17 (10): 486-492. DOI:
10.3923/ijps.2018.486.492.
Wang T, Jia L, Zhai X, Cui J, Wang J. 2019. The vocalizations and
hearing sensitivity of an explosive-breeding tropical Toad from
Southern China: A Test of the Matched Filter Hypothesis. Pakistan J
Zool 51 (2): 737-745. DOI: 10.17582/journal.pjz/2019.51.2.737.745.
Zulistiana T, Abinawanto A. 2018. Morphometric and bioacoustic
analysis Gaga chicken (Gallus gallus domesticus) at Bangkalan,
Kamal Madura. AIP Conf Proc 2023: 020142. DOI:
10.1063/1.5064139.
