IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v17y2006i3p459-465.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public information and conspecific nest parasitism in goldeneyes: targeting safe nests by parasites

Author

Listed:
  • Hannu Pöysä

Abstract

Conspecific nest parasitism (CNP) is a widespread alternative reproductive tactic in birds. Several hypotheses have been put forward to explain the evolution and occurrence of CNP, but no generally applicable hypothesis exists. Recent experimental results from the common goldeneye (Bucephala clangula), a cavity-nesting duck, have revealed that parasitic females preferentially lay eggs in safe nest-sites, implying that nest predation risk is an important ecological determinant of CNP. The present study focuses on the mechanisms by which parasites identify safe nest-sites. Predation risk of a given nest-site was predictable between successive breeding seasons. At the end of the nesting season, females prospected active nest-sites more frequently than nest-sites that did not have a nest in the current season. Nest-sites that had been prospected more frequently by females in year t had a higher probability to be parasitized in year t + 1. The results suggest that the use of public information, derived through nest-site prospecting, enabled parasites to target safe nests. These findings provide a new and potentially generally applicable perspective to understand the evolution and occurrence of CNP. Copyright 2006.

Suggested Citation

  • Hannu Pöysä, 2006. "Public information and conspecific nest parasitism in goldeneyes: targeting safe nests by parasites," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 17(3), pages 459-465, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:17:y:2006:i:3:p:459-465
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arj049
    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.

    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:17:y:2006:i:3:p:459-465. 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.