Brood provisioning rate and food allocation rules according to nestling begging in a clutch-adjusting species, the Rufous-tailed Scrub-robin Cercotrichas galactotes

• Autorzy: Moreno-Rueda G. , Soler M. , Martin-Vivaldi M. , Palomino J. J.

Warianty tytułu

PL

Liczba karmień i rozdział przynoszonego pokarmu w zależności od żebrania piskląt u drozdówki rdzawej

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Brood reduction may be a strategy by which, when food is scarce, parents provision chicks differentially — this usually leads to the death of the smaller nestlings. In contrast, in species where brood reduction does not normally occur, parents may allocate food equally among nestlings. The Rufous-tailed Scrub-robin Cercotrichas galactotes is a species in which brood reduction does not occur (it is a clutch adjuster), so that all nestlings usually fledge. This study analysed the food allocation rules in this species. As predicted, begging behaviour in nestlings seems to indicate their need for food, because once fed, they reduced their begging levels. Parents provisioning the nest allocated food according to begging by nestlings. Those nestlings that got fed begged nearer the parents, with lower latency and higher intensity, and stretched up to a greater height while begging. Moreover, the feeding rate was higher when more nestlings begged in the nest. There were slight differences between males and females with respect to prey type brought to the nest. Bigger nestlings got a larger proportion of food because they begged more intensely, but there was no evidence of parental favouritism towards bigger chicks.

PL

Wiele ptaków stosuje strategię redukcji lęgu, rozpoczynając wysiadywanie przed złożeniem ostatniego jaja, co prowadzi do powstania hierarchii wielkości młodych. Dostępny pokarm trafia przede wszystkim do większych piskląt, a w przypadku jego niedoborów najmłodsze pisklęta giną. Z drugiej strony ptaki, mogą dopasować swe zniesienia do warunków pokarmowych i wyprowadzać następnie wszystkie wyklute pisklęta. W takiej sytuacji powinny one karmić swe młode bez jakichkolwiek preferencji, a sygnałem o potrzebach piskląt może być sposób i intensywność ich żebrania. W pracy badano sposób rozdzielania pokarmu pomiędzy pisklęta drozdówki rdzawej w zależności od intensywności żebrania młodych. Gatunek ten karmi zwykle jedno pisklę za jednym przylotem do gniazda. Badaniami objęto 10 lęgów, z trzema i czterema pisklętami a zachowania ptaków analizowane były z nagrań wideo. Analizowano kolejność rozpoczynania żebrania i jego intensywność, położenie piskląt względem rodzica, biorąc pod uwagę osobnika, który został nakarmiony i te, które nie otrzymały pokarmu. Stwierdzono, że samice karmiły młode częściej i przynosiły więcej pokarmu niż samce. Proporcja różnych grup zdobyczy przynoszonej do gniazda różniła się między samcami i samicami (Tab. 1). Im więcej młodych żebrało, tym liczba karmień była większa, szczególnie tych wykonywanych przez samice. Poszczególny elementy, które składały się na opis żebrania były ze sobą skorelowane (Tab. 2). Rodzice rozdzielali pokarm w zależności od sposobu żebrania, karmione były młode znajdujące się najbliżej rodzica i najintensywniej domagające się pokarmu (Fig. 1). Największe młode dostawały więcej pokarmu, gdyż zebrały bardziej intensywnie (Fig. 2, 3), ale nie stwierdzono jakiegokolwiek preferowania tych piskląt ze strony rodziców. Żebranie odzwierciedlało potrzeby piskląt, gdyż ptaki nakarmione, domagały się o pokarm mniej intensywnie (Fig. 4).

Słowa kluczowe

EN

bird; Rufous-tailed Scrub-robin; Cercotrichas galactotes; brood provisioning rate; food allocation rule; nestling begging; clutch-adjusting species; breeding strategy; parental care

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Acta Ornithologica
• Rocznik: 2009
• Tom: 44
• Numer: 2
• Opis fizyczny: p.167-175,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Moreno-Rueda G.

• Konrad Lorenz Institut fur Vergleichende Verhaltensforschung, Osterreischische Academie der Wissenschaften, Savoyenstrasse la, A-1160, Wien, Austria
• Departmento de Biología Animal, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Granada, E-18071, Granada, Spain

autor

Soler M.

• Departmento de Biología Animal, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Granada, E-18071, Granada, Spain

autor

Martin-Vivaldi M.

• Departmento de Biología Animal, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Granada, E-18071, Granada, Spain

autor

Palomino J. J.

• Departmento de Biología Animal, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Granada, E-18071, Granada, Spain

Bibliografia

• Álvarez F. 2000. Relationship between tail color pattern and reproductive success, mate acquisition and nest predation in rufous bush chats. Condor 102: 708-712.
• Barba E., Gil-Delgado J. A., Monrós J. S. 1993. Factors affecting nestling growth in the great tit Parus major. Ardeola 40: 121-131.
• Bengtsson H., Rydén O. 1981. Development of parent-young interaction in asynchronously hatched broods of altricial birds. Ethology 56: 255-272. Bengtsson H., Rydén O. 1983. Parental feeding rate in relation to begging behavior in asynchronously hatched broods of the great tit Parus major. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 12: 243-251.
• Björklund M. 1997. Variation in growth in the blue tit (Parus
• caeruleus). J. Evol. Biol. 10:139-155.
• Bonabeau E., Deneubourg J.-L., Theraulaz G. 1998. Within- brood competition and the optimal partitioning of parental investment. Am. Nat. 152: 419-427.
• Budden A., Wright J. 2008. Effects of feeding frequency on
• nestling begging and digestion. Ibis 150: 234-241.
• Clutton-Brock T. H. 1991. The evolution of parental care.
• Princeton University Press. Princeton.
• Cotton P. A., Wright J., Kacelnik A. 1999. Chick begging strategies in relation to brood hierarchies and hatching asynchrony. Am. Nat. 153: 412-420.
• Cramp S. 1998. The complete birds of the Western Palearctic on
• CD-ROM. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
• Davis J. N., Todd P. M., Bullock S. 1999. Environmental quality predicts parental provisioning decisions. Proc. Roy. Soc. B 266: 1791-1797.
• Forbes L. S., Glassey B., Thornton S., Earle L. 2001. The secondary adjustment of clutch size in red-winged blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 50: 37-44.
• Godfray H. C. J. 1991. Signalling of need by offspring to their
• parents. Nature 352: 328-330.
• Godfray H. C. J. 1995. Signaling of need between parents and young: parent-offspring conflict and sibling rivalry. Am. Nat. 146: 1-24.
• Gottlander K. 1987. Parental feeding behaviour and sibling competition in the pied flycatcher Ficedula hypoleuca. J. Avian Biol. 18: 269-276.
• Harper A. B. 1986. The evolution of begging: sibling competition and parent-offspring conflict. Am. Nat. 128: 99-114.
• Hurlbert S. H. 1984. Pseudoreplication and the design of ecological field experiments. Ecol. Monogr. 54: 187-211.
• Hussell D. J. T. 1988. Supply and demand in tree swallow broods: a model of parent-offspring food provisioning interactions in birds. Am. Nat. 131: 175-202.
• Hussell D. J. T. 1991. Regulation of food provisioning in broods of altricial birds. In: Bell B. D. (ed.). Acta XX Congr. Intern. Ornithol. New Zealand Ornithological Congress Trust Board, Christchurch, pp. 946-960.
• Iacovides S., Evans R. M. 1998. Begging as graded signals of need for food in young ring-billed gulls. Anim. Behav. 56: 79-85.
• Jeon J. 2008. Evolution of parental favoritism among different- aged offspring. Behav. Ecol. 19: 344-352.
• Kacelnik A., Cotton P. A., Stirling L., Wright J. 1995. Food allocation among nestling starlings: sibling competition and the scope of parental choice. Proc. Roy. Soc. B 259: 259-263.
• Kilner R. 1997. Mouth colour is a reliable signal of need in begging canary nestlings. Proc. Roy. Soc. B 264: 963-968.
• Kilner R., Davies N. B. 1999. How selfish is a cuckoo chick? Anim. Behav. 58: 797-808.
• Kilner R., Johnstone R. A. 1997. Begging the question: are offspring solicitation behaviours signals of need? Trends Ecol. Evol. 12: 11-15.
• Kilner R., Noble D. G., Davies N. B. 1999. Signals of need in parent-offspring communication and their exploitation by the common cuckoo. Nature 397: 667-672.
• Kölliker M., Brodie III E. D., Moore A. J. 2005. The coadaptation of parental supply and offspring demand. Am. Nat. 166: 506-516.
• Krupa M. 2004. Food of the Willow Warbler Phylloscopus trochilus nestlings: differences related to the age of nestlings and sex of feeding parents. Acta Ornithol. 39: 45-51.
• Laaksonen T. 2004. Hatching asynchrony as a bet-hedging strategy — an offspring diversity hypothesis. Oikos 104: 616-620.
• Lack D. 1968. Ecological adaptations for breeding in birds. Chapman & Hall. London.
• Lazarus J., Inglis I.1986. Shared and unshared parental investment, parent-offspring conflict, and brood size. Anim. Behav. 34: 1791-1804.
• Leonard M. L., Horn A. G. 1996. Provisioning rules in tree swallows. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 38: 341-347.
• Leonard M. L., Horn A. G. 2001. Begging in the absence of parents by nestling tree swallows. Behav. Ecol. 12: 501- 505.
• Leonard M. L., Horn A. G. 2006. Age-related changes in signalling of need by nestling tree swallows (Tachycineta bicolor). Ethology 112: 1020-1026.
• Lichtenstein G. 2001. Selfish begging by screaming cowbirds, a mimetic brood parasite of the bay-winged cowbird. Anim. Behav. 61: 1151-1158.
• Macnair M., Parker G. A. 1979. Models of parent-offspring conflict. III. Intrabrood conflict. Anim. Behav. 27: 1202-1209.
• Magrath R. D. 1989. Hatching asynchrony and reproductive success in the blackbird. Nature 339: 536-538.
• Magrath R. D. 1990. Hatching asynchrony in altricial birds. Biol. Rev. 65: 587-622.
• Markman S., Yom-Tov Y., Wright J. 1995. Male parental care in the orange-tufted sunbird: behavioural adjustments in provisioning and nest guarding effort. Anim. Behav. 50: 655-669.
• Martín-Gálvez D., Soler M., Soler J. J., Martin-Vivaldi M., Palomino J. J. 2005. Food acquisition by common cuckoo nestlings in rufous bush robin nests and the advantage of the eviction behaviour. Anim. Behav. 70: 1313-1321.
• Mock D. W., Parker G. A. 1997. The evolution of sibling rivalry. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
• Moreno-Rueda G. 2005. A trade-off between predation risk and sibling competition in the begging behavior of Coal and Great Tits. J. Field Ornithol. 76: 390-394.
• Moreno-Rueda G., Soler M., Soler J. J., Martínez J. G., Pérez- Contreras T. 2007. Rules of food allocation between nestlings of the Black-billed Magpie Pica pica, a species showing brood reduction. Ardeola 54: 15-25.
• Ostreiher R. 1997. Food division in the Arabian babbler nest: adult choice or nestling competition? Behav. Ecol. 8: 233-238.
• Ostreiher R. 2001. The importance of nestling location for obtaining food in open cup-nests. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 49: 340-347.
• Palomino J. J. 1997. [Reproductive ecology and parental care in the rufous-tailed scrub-robin: responses to parasitism by cuckoo]. PhD thesis. University of Granada.
• Queller D. C. 1997. Why do females care more than males? Proc. Roy. Soc. B 264: 1555-1557.
• Quinn G. P., Keough M. J. 2002. Experimental design and data analysis for biologists. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
• Redondo T., Castro F. 1992. Signalling of nutritional need by magpie nestlings. Ethology 92: 193-204.
• Rodríguez C., Johst K., Bustamante J. 2008. Parental versus offspring control on food division within the brood: the role of hatching asynchrony. Oikos 117: 719-728.
• Royle N. J. 2000. Overproduction in the Lesser Black-backed Gull — can marginal chicks overcome the initial handicap of hatching asynchrony? J. Avian Biol. 31: 335-344.
• Rydén O., Bengtsson H. 1980. Differential begging and locomotory behaviour by early and late hatched nestlings affecting the distribution of food in asynchronously hatched broods of altricial birds. Ethology 53: 209-224.
• Schwabl H., Mock D. W., Gieg J. A. 1997. A hormonal mechanism for parental favouritism. Nature 386: 231.
• Seoane J. 2005. [The Rufous-tailed Scrub-robin in Spain. I National Census (2004)). SEO/BirdLife. Madrid
• Siegel S., Castellan N. J. Jr. 1988. Non-parametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. McGraw-Hill, Singapore.
• Smiseth P. T., Amundsen T., Hansen L. T. T. 1998. Do males and females differ in the feeding of large and small siblings? An experiment with the bluethroat. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 42: 321-328.
• Smiseth P. T., Bu R. J., Eikenæs A. K., Amundsen T. 2003. Food limitation in asynchronous bluethroat broods: effects on food distribution, nestling begging, and parental provisioning rules. Behav. Ecol. 14: 793-801.
• Smith H. G., Montgomerie R. 1991. Nestling American robins compete with siblings by begging. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 29: 307-312.
• Sokal R. R., Rohlf F. J. 1995. Biometry. Freeman. New York.
• Soler M. 2001. Begging behaviour of nestlings and food delivery by parents: the importance of breeding strategy. Acta Ethol. 4: 59-63.
• Stenning M. J. 1996. Hatching asynchrony, brood reduction and other rapidly reproducing hypotheses. Trends Ecol. Evol. 11: 243-246.
• Teather K. L. 1992. An experimental study of competition for food between male and female nestlings of the red-winged blackbird. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 31: 81-87.
• Trivers R. L. 1974. Parent-offspring conflict. Am. Zool. 14: 249-264.
• Tryjanowski P., Goławski A. 2004. Sex differences in nest defence by the red-backed shrike Lanius collurio: effects of offspring age, brood size, and stage of breeding season. J. Ethol. 22: 13-16.
• Westneat D. F., Sherman P. W. 1993. Parentage and the evolution of parental behavior. Behav. Ecol. 4: 66-77.
• Wiebe K. L., Slagsvold T. 2009. Parental sex differences in food allocation to junior brood members as mediated by prey size. Ethology 115: 49-58. Woodard J. D., Murphy M. T. 1999. Sex roles, parental experience and reproductive success of eastern kingbirds, Tyrannus tyrannus. Anim. Behav. 57: 105-115.
• Wright J. 1998. Helpers-at-the-nest have the same provisioning rule as parents: experimental evidence from play-backs of chick begging. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 42: 423-429.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.3161/000164509X482740