IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v23y2012i4p806-814..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Experimental evidence for cryptic interference among socially foraging shorebirds

Author

Listed:
  • Allert Imre Bijleveld
  • Eelke Olov Folmer
  • Theunis Piersma

Abstract

Foraging rate and the distribution of foragers depend on prey distribution in conjunction with interindividual interactions. Generalized functional response models predict intake rates and spatial distributions of foragers on the basis of resource distribution and interference competition. The adequacy of these models depends on how well they capture the foragers' essential behavior. In this paper, we report on the results of a foraging experiment designed to examine the mechanisms of interference competition using red knots Calidris canutus that feed on buried bivalves. Red knots are rarely observed to interfere in the field, but this does not imply absence of interference. Our experimental setup minimized resource depletion, which allowed us to quantify interference competition as the decline in intake rate as a function of group size, with prey density and social status as additional treatments. We found that intake rate and searching efficiency decreased with group size and that dominant birds had higher intake rates than subordinates. Additionally, time spent searching for prey increased with group size. The decrease in intake rate was not due to conventional interference mechanisms (such as kleptoparasitism and time spent interacting with conspecifics) but to "cryptic interference," that is, avoidance of physical encounters with conspecifics. To accurately predict intake rates and foraging distributions, theory and models need to account for the possibility that animals anticipate and try to avoid, at some costs, physical encounters with conspecifics (i.e., conflicts that would make conventional interference behavior visible).

Suggested Citation

  • Allert Imre Bijleveld & Eelke Olov Folmer & Theunis Piersma, 2012. "Experimental evidence for cryptic interference among socially foraging shorebirds," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 23(4), pages 806-814.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:23:y:2012:i:4:p:806-814.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/ars034
    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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wouter K. Vahl & Jaap van der Meer & Franz J. Weissing & Diederik van Dullemen & Theunis Piersma, 2005. "The mechanisms of interference competition: two experiments on foraging waders," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 16(5), pages 845-855, September.
    2. Anne L. Rutten & Kees Oosterbeek & Simon Verhulst & Niels J. Dingemanse & Bruno J. Ens, 2010. "Experimental evidence for interference competition in oystercatchers, Haematopus ostralegus. II. Free-living birds," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 21(6), pages 1261-1270.
    3. Anne L. Rutten & Kees Oosterbeek & Jaap van der Meer & Simon Verhulst & Bruno J. Ens, 2010. "Experimental evidence for interference competition in oystercatchers, Haematopus ostralegus. I. Captive birds," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 21(6), pages 1251-1260.
    4. Wouter K. Vahl & Tamar Lok & Jaap van der Meer & Theunis Piersma & Franz J. Weissing, 2005. "Spatial clumping of food and social dominance affect interference competition among ruddy turnstones," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 16(5), pages 834-844, September.
    5. Isabel M. Smallegange & Jaap van der Meer, 2009. "The distribution of unequal predators across food patches is not necessarily (semi)truncated," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 20(3), pages 525-534.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jo Dorning & Stephen Harris, 2017. "Dominance, gender, and season influence food patch use in a group-living, solitary foraging canid," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 28(5), pages 1302-1313.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rappoldt, Cornelis & Stillman, Richard A. & Ens, Bruno J., 2010. "A geometrical model for the effect of interference on food intake," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(2), pages 147-151.
    2. Jo Dorning & Stephen Harris, 2017. "Dominance, gender, and season influence food patch use in a group-living, solitary foraging canid," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 28(5), pages 1302-1313.
    3. Castillo-Alvino, Hamlet Humberto & Marvá, Marcos, 2022. "Group defense promotes coexistence in interference competition: The Holling type IV competitive response," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 198(C), pages 426-445.
    4. Jutta Leyrer & Tamar Lok & Maarten Brugge & Anne Dekinga & Bernard Spaans & Jan A. van Gils & Brett K. Sandercock & Theunis Piersma, 2012. "Small-scale demographic structure suggests preemptive behavior in a flocking shorebird," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 23(6), pages 1226-1233.
    5. Christoforos Hadjichrysanthou & Mark Broom, 2012. "When should animals share food? Game theory applied to kleptoparasitic populations with food sharing," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 23(5), pages 977-991.

    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:23:y:2012:i:4:p:806-814.. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.