Predator detection and avoidance by starlings under differing scenarios of predation risk

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 303-309

  Devereux, Claire L ^a,b   Whittingham, Mark J ^a,b   Fernández Juricic, Esteban ^c   Vickery, Juliet A ^d   Krebs, John R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d THE NUNNERY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Interscan interval; Predation risk; Starlings; Vigilance; Visibility; Vision

Indexed keywords

ANTIPREDATOR DEFENSE; FORAGING BEHAVIOR; PREDATION RISK; PREDATOR-PREY INTERACTION; VIGILANCE;

ANIMALIA; STURNIDAE;

EID: 32144436088     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arj032     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Arenz CL, Leger DW, 1997. Artificial visual obstruction, antipredator vigilance, and predator detection in the thirteen-lined squirrel (Spermophilus tridecemlineatus). Behaviour 134:1101-1114.
2. Barnett PR, Whittingham MJ, Bradbury RB, Wilson JD, 2004. A comparison of the use of unimproved and improved lowland grassland by birds in winter. Agric Ecosyst Environ 102:49-60.
3. Bednekoff PA, Lima SL, 1998. Randomness, chaos and confusion in the study of antipredator vigilance. Trends Ecol Evol 13:284-287.
4. Bednekoff PA, Lima SL, 2005. Testing for peripheral vigilance: do birds value what they see when not overtly vigilant? Anim Behav 69:1165-1171.
5. Butler SJ, Whittingham MJ, Quinn JL, Cresswell W, 2005. Quantifying the interaction between food density and habitat structure in determining patch selection. Anim Behav 69:337-343.
6. Chamberlain DE, Wilson JD, Fuller RJ, 1999. A comparison of bird populations on organic and conventional farm systems in southern Britain. Biol Conserv 88:307-320.
7. Cowlishaw G, Lawes MJ, Lightbody M, Martin A, Pettifor R, Rowcliffe JM, 2004. A simple rule for the costs of vigilance: empirical evidence from a social forager. Proc R Soc Lond B 271:27-33.
8. Cresswell W, Hilton GM, Ruxton GD, 2000. Evidence for a rule governing the avoidance of superfluous escape flights. Proc R Soc Lond B 267:733-737.
9. Cresswell W, Quinn JL, Whittingham MJ, Butler S, 2003. Good foragers can also be good at detecting predators. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:1069-1076.
10. Crick HQP, Robinson RA, Siriwardena GM, 2002. Causes of the population declines: summary and recommendations. In: Investigation into the causes of the decline of starlings and house sparrows in Great Britain (Crick HQP, Robinson RA, Appleton GF, Clark NA, Rickard AD, eds). Bristol: DEFRA; 263-290.
11. Danchin E, Giraldeau L, Valone TJ, Wagner RH, 2004. Public information: from noisy neighbors to cultural evolution. Science 305:487-491.
12. Devereux CL, McKeever CU, Benton TG, Whittingham MJ, 2004. The effect of sward height and drainage on common starlings Sturnus vulgaris and Northern Lapwings Vanellus vanellus foraging in grassland habitats. Ibis 146(suppl. 2):115-122.
13. Donald PF, Green RE, Heath MF, 2001. Agricultural intensification and the collapse of Europe's farmland bird populations. Proc R Soc Lond B 268:25-29.
14. Dunnet GM, 1955. The breeding of the starling Sturnus vulgaris in relation to its food supply. Ibis 97:619-662.
15. Dunnet GM, 1956. The autumn and winter mortality of starlings Sturnus vulgaris in relation to their food supply. Ibis 98:220-230.
16. Feare CJ, 1984. The starling. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
17. Fernández-Juricic E, Erichsen JT, Kacelnik A, 2004a. Visual perception and social foraging in birds. Trends Ecol Evol 19:25-31.
18. Fernández-Juricic E, Siller S, Kacelnik A, 2004b. Flock density, social foraging and scanning: an experiment with starlings. Behav Ecol 15:371-379.
19. Fernández-Juricic E, Smith R, Kacelnik A, 2005. Increasing the costs of conspecific scanning in socially foraging starlings affects vigilance and foraging behaviour. Anim Behav 69:73-81.
20. Freeman SN, Robinson RA, Clarke JA, Griffin BM, Adams SY, 2002. Population dynamics of starlings Sturnus vulgaris breeding in Britain: an integrated analysis. In: Investigation into the causes of the decline of starlings and house sparrows in Great Britain (Crick HQP, Robinson RA, Appleton GF, Clark NA, Rickard AD, eds). Bristol: DEFRA; 121-139.
21. Glück E, 1987. An experimental study of feeding, vigilance and predator avoidance in a single bird. Oecologia 71:268-272.
22. Gregory RD, Noble DG, Custance J, 2004. The state of play of farmland birds: population trends and conservation status of lowland farmland birds in the United Kingdom. Ibis 146:1-13.
23. Gregory RD, Wilkinson NI, Noble DG, Robinson RA, Brown AF, Hughes J, Procter D, Gibbons DW, Galbraith CA, 2002. The population status of birds in the United Kingdom, Channel Islands and Isle of Man: an analysis of conservation concern 2002-2007. Br Birds 95:410-448.
24. Guillemain M, Duncan P, Fritz H, 2001. Switching to a feeding method that obstructs vision increases head-vip vigilance in dabbling ducks. J Avian Biol 32:345-350.
25. Hilton GM, Cresswell W, Ruxton GD, 1999. Intraflock variation in the speed of escape-flight response on attack by an avian predator. Behav Ecol 10:391-395.
26. Kaby U, Lind J, 2003. What limits predator detection in blue tits (Parvis caeruleus): posture, task or orientation? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 54:534-538.
27. Krebs JR, Wilson JD, Bradbury RB, Siriwardena GM, 1999. The second silent spring? Nature 400:611-612.
28. Lima SL, 1992. Vigilance and foraging substrate: anti-predatory considerations in a non-standard environment. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 30:283-289.
29. Lima SL, 1998. Nonlethal effects in the ecology of predator-prey interactions. Bioscience 48:25-34.
30. Lima SL, Bednekoff PA, 1999. Back to the basics of antipredatory vigilance: can nonvigilant animals detect attack? Anim Behav 58:537-543.
31. Lima SL, Dill LM, 1990. Behavioural decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. Can J Zool 68:619-640.
32. Lima SL, Zollner PA, 1996. Anti-predatory vigilance and limits to collective detection of predatory attack: spatial and visual separation between forages. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 38:355-363.
33. Martin GR, 1986. The eye of a passeriform bird, the European starling (Sturnus vulgaris) - eye-movement amplitude, visual fields and schematic optics. J Comp Physiol A 159:545-557.
34. Metcalfe NB, 1984. The effects of habitat on die vigilance of shorebirds - is visibility important? Anim Behav 32:981-985.
35. Noldus Information Technology, 1997. The observer support package for video analysis, reference manual, V 4.0. Wageningen: Noldus Information Technology.
36. Olsson O, Bruun M, Smith HG, 2002. Starling foraging success in relation to agricultural land-use. Ecography 25:363-372.
37. Perkins AJ, Whittingham MJ, Bradbury RB, Wilson JD, Morris AJ, Barnett PR, 2000. Habitat characteristics affecting use of lowland agricultural grassland by birds in winter. Biol Conserv 95:279-294.
38. Powell GVN, 1974. Experimental analysis of social value of flocking by starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) in relation to predation and foraging. Anim Behav 22:501-505.
39. Pulliam HR, 1973. On the advantages of flocking. J Theor Biol 38:419-422.
40. Pulliam HR, Pyke GH, Caraco T, 1982. Scanning behavior of juncos: a game-theoretical approach. J Theor Biol 95:89-103.
41. Quinn JL, Cresswell W, 2004. Predator hunting behavior and prey vunerability. J Anim Ecol 71:143-154.
42. Roberts G, 1996. Why individual vigilance decreases as group size increases. Anim Behav 51:1077-1086.
43. Robinson RA, Sutherland WJ, 2002. Post-war changes in arable farming and biodiversity in Great Britain. J Appl Ecol 39: 157-176.
44. Rolando A, 2001. Vigilance and neighbour distance in foraging flocks of red-billed choughs, Pyrrhocorax pyrrhocorax. J Zool 253:225-232.
45. Scannell J, Roberts G, Lazarus J, 2001. Prey scan at random to evade observant predators. Proc R Soc Lond B 268:541-547.
46. Siriwardena GM, Baillie SR, Buckland ST, Fewster RM, Marchant JH, Wilson JD, 1998. Trends in the abundance of farmland birds: a quantitative comparison of smoothed Common Birds Census indices. J Appl Ecol 35:24-43.
47. Siriwardena GM, Crick HQP, 2002. National trends in the breeding performance of starlings Sturnus vulgaris. In: Investigation into the causes of the decline of starlings and house sparrows in Great Britain (Crick HQP, Robinson RA, Appleton GF, Clark NA, Rickard AD, eds). Bristol: DEFRA; 91-120.
48. Tinbergen JM, 1981. Foraging decisions in starlings (Sturnus vulgaris L.). Ardea 69:1-67.
49. Tucker GM, 1992. Effects of agricultural practices on field use by invertebrate-feeding birds in winter. J Appl Ecol 29:779-790.
50. Vickery JA, Tallowin JR, Feber RE, Asteraki EJ, Atkinson PW, Fuller RJ, Brown VK, 2001. The management of lowland neutral grasslands in Britain: effects of agricultural practices on birds and their food resources. J Appl Ecol 38:647-664.
51. Ward P, 1985. Why birds in flocks do not coordinate their vigilance periods. J Theor Biol 114:383-385.
52. Whitehead SC, Wright J, Cotton PA, 1995. Winter field use by the European starling Sturnus vulgaris - habitat preferences and the availability of prey. J Avian Biol 26:193-202.
53. Whittingham MJ, Evans KL, 2004. A review of the effects of habitat structure on predation risk of birds in agricultural landscapes. Ibis 146(suppl. 2):211-222.
54. Whittingham MJ, Butler SJ, Quinn JL, Creswell W, 2004. The effect of limited visibility on vigilance behavior and speed of predator detection: implications for the conservation of granivorous passerines. Oikos 106:377-385.