IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v20y2009i3p651-656.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conflict over parental care in house sparrows: do females use a negotiation rule?

Author

Listed:
  • Ádám Z. Lendvai
  • Zoltán Barta
  • Olivier Chastel

Abstract

Ho do parents resolve their conflict over parental care? The classical "sealed-bid" model of biparental care suggested that parents use a fixed best effort given the partner's effort. Alternatively, parents may "negotiate" their actual effort until the efforts of both partners settle down to limiting values, but in this case, the resulting efforts will not be the best responses to one another. Consequently, under the best response scenario, the response of 1 parent to the removal of its mate can be predicted from the response to a reduction in its partner's effort, whereas the "negotiation" model predicts that such an extrapolation will underestimate the effort of a parent caring alone. We tested this prediction in free-living house sparrows (Passer domesticus). We experimentally manipulated the males' parental care as follows: males' care in group 1) was reduced by using a capture--handling--release stress protocol, 2) stopped by removing the male, and 3) left as control. In response to these manipulations, control females kept their feeding rate constant, whereas male-stressed-released females showed a moderate increase of feeding rate. When this response was extrapolated to zero male effort, their effort was still significantly lower than the observed effort of male-removed females. These results suggest that females may use the negotiation rule to determine their actual parental effort. Copyright 2009, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Ádám Z. Lendvai & Zoltán Barta & Olivier Chastel, 2009. "Conflict over parental care in house sparrows: do females use a negotiation rule?," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 20(3), pages 651-656.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:20:y:2009:i:3:p:651-656
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arp047
    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.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:20:y:2009:i:3:p:651-656. 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.