Author
Listed:
- Mark Broom
- Graeme D. Ruxton
- Rebecca M. Kilner
Abstract
Nestling brood parasites vary in the harm that they do to their companions in the nest. Here we use a game-theoretical model to attempt to account for this variation. Our model considers hosts that might routinely abandon single nestlings, regardless of whether they are host young or brood parasites and choose instead to reallocate their reproductive effort to future breeding. The nestling brood parasite must decide whether or not to kill all host young by balancing the benefits it stands to gain from reduced competition in the nest against the risk of desertion by host parents. The model predicts that 3 different types of evolutionarily stable strategies can exist. 1) When hosts routinely rear depleted broods, the brood parasite always kills host young, and the host never then abandons the nest. 2) Conversely, when adult survival after deserting single offspring is very high, hosts always abandon broods of one young, and the parasite never kills host offspring. 3) Intermediate strategies can also be evolutionarily stable, in which parasites sometimes kill their nest mates, and host parents sometimes desert nests that contain only a single chick. We provide quantitative descriptions of how the values given to ecological and behavioral parameters of the host-parasite system influence the probability of each strategy and compare our results with host--brood parasite associations seen in nature. Copyright 2008, Oxford University Press.
Suggested Citation
Mark Broom & Graeme D. Ruxton & Rebecca M. Kilner, 2008.
"Host life-history strategies and the evolution of chick-killing by brood parasitic offspring,"
Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 19(1), pages 22-34.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:beheco:v:19:y:2008:i:1:p:22-34
Download full text from publisher
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:19:y:2008:i:1:p:22-34. 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.