The annual spring peeper hocus pocus

The annual spring peeper hocus pocus

A spring peeper • Photo by Justin Meissen (CC BY-SA 2.0)

Originally published 22 April 1991

The spring peep­ers are in full for­tis­si­mo chorus.

On Nan­tuck­et they call these noisy lit­tle frogs pin­kletinks, pre­sum­ably because that’s how Nan­tuck­eters hear the sound. I’m not sure how I’d describe the peep­er’s call. Pin­kletink does­n’t do jus­tice to the vol­ume. Not peep-peep either. The peep­er’s voice is shrill and high pitched, and when the water mead­ow is in heady voice it’s like a zil­lion wed­ding guests clank­ing on glass­ware with spoons.

The peep­er is only an inch long, but it’s all voice-box from stem to stern. Most frogs call by inflat­ing air sacs under their chins; peep­ers inflate their whole bod­ies. The air is not expelled with each peep. The peep­er uses its body like a bag­piper’s bag; keeps it pumped up for the dura­tion of its ama­to­ry calls.

This year the cho­rus began on March 28. A week lat­er I stood by the side of the water mead­ow and the whole place seemed to sing. You’d swear they were every­where; a car­pet of sound stretched away from my feet. But not a peep­er to be seen. I scanned the water with binoc­u­lars. The weeds and the bush­es. Not a sign of the elu­sive frogs. Pure, dis­em­bod­ied pan­de­mo­ni­um. The water itself seemed to be emit­ting the noise.

Off with the shoes. Roll up the trousers. Into the water. Out to the very mid­dle of the water mead­ow. Silence, as if some­one has pulled the plug on the ampli­fi­er. I stand still as a stat­ue. Five min­utes, ten. Then, it starts up again, that ear-split­ting car­pet of sound. The peep­ers are still invisible.

Mating chorus

It’s the male frog mak­ing all the noise, and we know why. It’s that old spring busi­ness all over again: find­ing a mate. But why the tumul­tuous deci­bels? Why the din? Is the female peep­er deaf? Does she choose a mate by the ampli­tude of his call? Has evo­lu­tion cranked up the vol­ume of this cho­rus by find­ing some con­nec­tion between the loud­ness of the love song and repro­duc­tive fitness?

Or is it some­thing else, some­thing you won’t find in the biol­o­gy books — pure excess vital­i­ty, a capac­i­ty of water and muck to make noise, to celebrate.

Of course I’m being face­tious, but not alto­geth­er so. I’m talk­ing about the astound­ing resilien­cy of life, its abil­i­ty to sur­vive the harsh­est con­di­tions and to spring up in the unlike­li­est places. The Roman nat­u­ral­ist Pliny the Elder won­dered about all those frogs com­ing out of nowhere in the spring with their out­ra­geous rack­et, and attrib­uted it to an “occult oper­a­tion” by nature. In oth­er words, mag­ic. Slight-of-hand. Hocus-pocus.

We are more hard-head­ed about it. We know the peep­ers have been there all along, buried in the mud through­out the long win­ter, just wait­ing for a cou­ple of warm days to beck­on them up into song. But what about life itself? What “occult oper­a­tion” of nature con­jured up life on the Earth near­ly 4 bil­lion years ago, out of water and muck? One minute the plan­et was life­less (pre­sum­ably), and the next minute (give or take a few tens of mil­lions of years) the whole place was swim­ming with microbes — and it’s been swim­ming ever since.

Most biol­o­gists believe that life began spon­ta­neous­ly from non-liv­ing mate­ri­als. Dar­win imag­ined it hap­pened in a “warm lit­tle pond” some­where on the ear­ly Earth, the qui­et­ly sim­mer­ing primeval soup so dear to gen­er­a­tions of biol­o­gists. Accord­ing to this the­o­ry, chem­i­cals stew­ing in water formed them­selves into pro­teins, RNA, DNA, and ulti­mate­ly the first liv­ing cells.

Chaotic birth

But Dar­win’s warm lit­tle pond may nev­er have exist­ed. Recent­ly, plan­e­tary sci­en­tists have been telling us that Earth was a nasty place back at about the time life was start­ing. The sur­face of the plan­et was sub­ject to ram­pant vol­can­ism. Mete­orites rained from the sky for hun­dreds of mil­lions of years, the same inces­sant bom­bard­ment that pul­ver­ized the sur­face of the moon (on Earth the evi­dence of that ear­ly bom­bard­ment has been erased by ero­sion and tec­ton­ic activ­i­ty). A few mete­orites may have car­ried enough ener­gy to com­plete­ly vapor­ize the oceans.

It’s hard to imag­ine how or where in the midst of such chaos the com­plex and del­i­cate struc­tures of life were cre­at­ed and sus­tained. Per­haps it hap­pened near vol­canic fis­sures on the floors of the deep­est oceans, even as the mete­orites pelt­ed down. Or per­haps in hot springs on con­ti­nents as the bom­bard­ment waned.

Since no one knows how life began, I’ll opt for the the­o­ry that it was all more or less inevitable. Start with a hydro­gen-rich envi­ron­ment, throw in some car­bon, expose it to ener­gy, and — presto! — you’ve got amino acids, phos­phates, sug­ars, and organ­ic bases, the chem­i­cal build­ing blocks of life. Add cycles of heat and cold, dry and wet, light and dark­ness, maybe a cat­a­lyst like iron pyrites or clay, and any old plan­et with a rea­son­ably mod­er­ate envi­ron­ment will pull the rab­bit out of the hat. Or the peep­ers out of the pond.

I can’t prove it but I choose to believe that water and muck has a built-in ten­den­cy toward ani­ma­tion, and that life is ubiq­ui­tous, not only here but through­out the uni­verse. I don’t mean to sound mys­ti­cal, but if we’ve learned any­thing in the 20th cen­tu­ry it is that mat­ter, plain old mat­ter, is sub­tle stuff, rich in pos­si­bil­i­ties of combination.

Just lis­ten to that rack­et ris­ing from the water mead­ow. That’s what the spring peep­ers’ hal­lelu­jah cho­rus is all about: the sheer, unstop­pable ebul­lience of life.

Share this Musing: