IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v22y2011i2p422-428.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Use of social over personal information enhances nest defense against avian brood parasitism

Author

Listed:
  • Daniela Campobello
  • Spencer G. Sealy

Abstract

Interactions with conspecifics influence the behavioral repertoire of an organism, as they apply to foraging techniques, song acquisition, habitat selection, and mate choice. Few workers have studied the role of social interactions in molding defense responses, especially the defense of the nest. We tested the effect of social interaction on nest defense of the reed warbler (Acrocephalus scirpaceus), one of the main hosts of the brood-parasitic common cuckoo (Cuculus canorus) in Europe. This parasite reduces its host's breeding success; therefore, any response that prevents successful parasitism should be selected. Because of their high nesting density and consistent cuckoo-specific responses that also recruit conspecifics, reed warblers may benefit by acquiring already-competent antiparasite responses from conspecifics instead of incurring the costs implicit in trial-and-error attempts. Using treatments that included presentations of taxidermic mounts, clutch manipulations, and playbacks, we tested the effect of conspecific defense on the response intensity of nesting reed warblers. Exposure to social cues resulted in an increase of cuckoo-specific nest defense responses, whereas experience with natural or experimental parasitism did not produce any change in defense intensity. The preferential use of social cues rather than personal experience as it applies to the enhancement of mobbing was consistent with what was found in other behaviors, where the strategy adopted by individuals was the result of costly acquisition of personal information and reliability of social cues. Copyright 2011, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniela Campobello & Spencer G. Sealy, 2011. "Use of social over personal information enhances nest defense against avian brood parasitism," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 22(2), pages 422-428.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:22:y:2011:i:2:p:422-428
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arq225
    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. Daniela Campobello & Maurizio Sarà & James F. Hare, 2012. "Under my wing: lesser kestrels and jackdaws derive reciprocal benefits in mixed-species colonies," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 23(2), pages 425-433.
    2. Justin A. Welbergen & Nicholas B. Davies, 2012. "Direct and indirect assessment of parasitism risk by a cuckoo host," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 23(4), pages 783-789.
    3. Holger Zimmermann & Radim Blažek & Matej Polačik & Martin Reichard, 2022. "Individual experience as a key to success for the cuckoo catfish brood parasitism," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, December.
    4. Miklós Bán & Csaba Moskát & Zoltán Barta & Márk E. Hauber, 2013. "Simultaneous viewing of own and parasitic eggs is not required for egg rejection by a cuckoo host," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 24(4), pages 1014-1021.

    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:22:y:2011:i:2:p:422-428. 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.