Author
Listed:
- Blaine Landsborough
- David R Wilson
- Daniel J Mennill
- Marc Naguib
Abstract
When animals vocalize under the threat of predation, variation in the structure of calls can play a vital role in survival. The chick-a-dee calls of chickadees and titmice provide a model system for studying communication in such contexts. In previous studies, birds’ responses to chick-a-dee calls covaried with call structure, but also with unmeasured and correlated parameters of the calling sequence, including duty cycle (the proportion of the calling sequence when a signal was present). In this study, we exposed flocks of Black-capped Chickadees (Poecile atricapillus) and heterospecific birds to playback of chick-a-dee calls and taxidermic models of predators. We quantified birds’ responses to variation in number of D notes and duty cycle of the signalling sequence. Chickadees and heterospecific birds responded more intensely to high-duty-cycle treatments, and equally to treatments where duty cycle was held constant and the number of D notes varied. Although our study does not disentangle the effects of call rate and duty cycle, it is the first to investigate independently the behavioural responses of birds to variation in structural and sequence-level parameters of the chick-a-dee call during a predator confrontation. Critically, our results confirm that the pattern previously observed in a feeding context holds true in a mobbing context: variation in calling sequences, not in call structure, is the salient acoustic feature of chick-a-dee calls. These results call into question the idea that chick-a-dee call structure carries allometric information about predator size, suggesting instead that sequence-level parameters play a central role in communication in a mobbing context. Lay Summary Many animals use vocalizations when mobbing predators. Vocal behavior may communicate information about the threat posed by the predator. Using playback of chick-a-dee calls during a simulated predator confrontation, we show that birds respond more intensely to treatments with greater vocal output, but do not respond differently to calls that differ in the number of dee notes. Our results reveal that variation in calling sequences plays a central role in communication in a mobbing context.
Suggested Citation
Blaine Landsborough & David R Wilson & Daniel J Mennill & Marc Naguib, 2020.
"Variation in chick-a-dee call sequences, not in the fine structure of chick-a-dee calls, influences mobbing behaviour in mixed-species flocks,"
Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 31(1), pages 54-62.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:beheco:v:31:y:2020:i:1:p:54-62.
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:31:y:2020:i:1:p:54-62.. 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.