Author
Listed:
- Juan C. Alonso
- Jose M. Álvarez-Martínez
- Carlos Palacín
Abstract
We studied the effects of female distribution, topography, and human infrastructures on lek-site selection in a ground-displaying bird, the great bustard Otis tarda. Our aim was to investigate the relative importance of maximizing visibility to females (hotspot hypothesis) versus minimizing predation risk (predation avoidance hypothesis). Using a geographic information system, a very high-resolution digital elevation model, and an extensive survey database, we compared the 350 lek centers known in Spain with randomly generated sites. Males preferred lek sites that increase their visibility to surrounding females, reduce the distance to them, enhance the probability of detecting predators, and increase the distance to human disturbance sources. Logistic regression analyses confirmed these patterns. A final model identified five relevant variables indicative of higher short-range visibility, more centered location with respect to females, and farther distance to human disturbance sources in lek centers compared with random points. The viewshed gain of lek centers relative to random points was maximal at the center and disappeared gradually at randomly generated replicas located progressively farther away from the center, but still within a buffer equivalent to the home range of the male flock during the display period. Visibility maximization may be the reason why lek centers are extremely fixed within and between consecutive breeding seasons. Our results are compatible with both hotspot and predation avoidance hypotheses. We suggest that both models are important, at least for species displaying in open habitats. Lek-site selection probably represents a combined response to female attraction and predator avoidance selective pressures.
Suggested Citation
Juan C. Alonso & Jose M. Álvarez-Martínez & Carlos Palacín, 2012.
"Leks in ground-displaying birds: hotspots or safe places?,"
Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 23(3), pages 491-501.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:beheco:v:23:y:2012:i:3:p:491-501.
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:23:y:2012:i:3:p:491-501.. 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.