IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v16y2005i4p686-692.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The evolution of egg rejection by cuckoo hosts in Australia and Europe

Author

Listed:
  • N.E. Langmore
  • R.M. Kilner
  • S.H.M. Butchart
  • G. Maurer
  • N.B. Davies
  • A. Cockburn
  • N.A. Macgregor
  • A. Peters
  • M.J.L. Magrath
  • D.K. Dowling

Abstract

Exploitation of hosts by brood parasitic cuckoos is expected to stimulate a coevolutionary arms race of adaptations and counteradaptations. However, some hosts have not evolved defenses against parasitism. One hypothesis to explain a lack of host defenses is that the life-history strategies of some hosts reduce the cost of parasitism to the extent that accepting parasitic eggs in the nest is evolutionarily stable. Under this hypothesis, it pays hosts to accept cuckoo eggs if (1) the energetic cost of raising the cuckoo is low, (2) there is time to renest, and (3) clutch size is small. We parasitized the nests of host and nonhost species with nonmimetic model eggs to test whether the evolution of egg recognition by cuckoo hosts could be explained by life-history variables of the host. The most significant factor explaining rates of rejection of model eggs was whether or not a species was a cuckoo host, with hosts rejecting model eggs at a higher rate than nonhosts. Egg-rejection rates were also explained by visibility within the nest and by cuckoo mass. We found little support for the life-history model of egg rejection. Our results suggest that parasitism is always sufficiently costly to select for host defenses and that the evolution of defenses may be limited by proximate constraints such as visibility within the nest. Copyright 2005.

Suggested Citation

  • N.E. Langmore & R.M. Kilner & S.H.M. Butchart & G. Maurer & N.B. Davies & A. Cockburn & N.A. Macgregor & A. Peters & M.J.L. Magrath & D.K. Dowling, 2005. "The evolution of egg rejection by cuckoo hosts in Australia and Europe," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 16(4), pages 686-692, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:16:y:2005:i:4:p:686-692
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/ari041
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Francisco Ruiz-Raya & Manuel Soler & Lucía Ll Sánchez-Pérez & Juan Diego Ibáñez-Álamo, 2015. "Could a Factor That Does Not Affect Egg Recognition Influence the Decision of Rejection?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-10, August.
    2. William E. Feeney & Mary Caswell Stoddard & Rebecca M. Kilner & Naomi E. Langmore, 2014. ""Jack-of-all-trades" egg mimicry in the brood parasitic Horsfield’s bronze-cuckoo?," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 25(6), pages 1365-1373.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:16:y:2005:i:4:p:686-692. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.