IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v31y2020i3p761-771..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Predator defense is shaped by risk, brood value and social group benefits in a cooperative breeder

Author

Listed:
  • Niki Teunissen
  • Sjouke A Kingma
  • Anne Peters
  • Amanda Ridley

Abstract

Predation is a major cause of mortality and nest failure in birds. Cooperative predator defense can enhance nest success and adult survival but, because it is inherently risky, dynamic risk assessment theory predicts that individuals modify defense behavior according to the risk posed by the predator. Parental investment theory, on the other hand, predicts that reproductive payoffs (brood value) determine investment in nest defense. We propose that, in cooperative breeders, fitness benefits deriving from the survival of other group members may additionally influence defense behavior (social group benefits theory). We tested predictions of these theories in the cooperatively breeding purple-crowned fairy-wren, Malurus coronatus, where brood value is higher for breeders, but social group benefits more important for helpers. We recorded experimentally induced individual defense behaviors in response to predator models presented near nests, representing differing levels of threat to nests and adults. As predicted, 1) individuals engaged in less risky defenses when encountering a more dangerous predator (dynamic risk assessment theory); 2) individuals defended older broods more often, and breeders defended more than helpers (parental investment theory); and 3) helpers were more likely to respond to a predator of adults (social group benefits theory). Our findings highlight that predator defense in cooperative breeders is complex, shaped by the combination of immediate risk and multiple benefits.

Suggested Citation

  • Niki Teunissen & Sjouke A Kingma & Anne Peters & Amanda Ridley, 2020. "Predator defense is shaped by risk, brood value and social group benefits in a cooperative breeder," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 31(3), pages 761-771.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:31:y:2020:i:3:p:761-771.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/araa012
    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.

    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:3:p:761-771.. 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.