Author
Listed:
- Çağlar Akçay
- Allie Clay
- S. Elizabeth Campbell
- Michael D. Beecher
Abstract
Eavesdropping by predators imposes a major cost on signalers, which in turn have evolved a number of strategies to deal with this cost. These strategies however, have not been well studied in the context of aggressive signaling. Here, we report an experiment on male song sparrows (Melospiza melodia) in which we experimentally increased the perceived predation risk by playing Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperi) calls or control Northern flicker (Colaptes auratus) calls in the midst of a simulated conspecific territorial intrusion and assessed the change in signaling strategies. We found that song sparrows clearly discriminated between the hawk call and the flicker call. Specifically, subjects decreased number of songs and wing wave displays (a visual signal of aggressive intent) and increased alarm calling during the hawk playback. However, the change in signaling behaviors did not persist when the simulated intruder resumed his challenge, despite the fact that the subjects were still alarmed as indicated by high rates of alarm calling. Additionally, we found no evidence for the eavesdropping avoidance hypothesis as an explanation for the low amplitude of soft song, the most reliable signal of aggression in this species. These results suggest that male song sparrows flexibly adjust their signaling effort in response to both the predation risk and the need to defend their territory against an intruder.
Suggested Citation
Çağlar Akçay & Allie Clay & S. Elizabeth Campbell & Michael D. Beecher, 2016.
"The sparrow and the hawk: aggressive signaling under risk of predation,"
Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 27(2), pages 601-607.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:beheco:v:27:y:2016:i:2:p:601-607.
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:27:y:2016:i:2:p:601-607.. 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.