Eastern chipmunks increase their perception of predation risk in response to titmouse alarm calls

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 759-763

  Schmidt, Kenneth A ^a   Lee, Eunice ^a   Ostfeld, Richard S ^b   Sieving, Kathryn ^c  

^a TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b CARY INSTITUTE OF ECOSYSTEM STUDIES   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

Alarm calls; Eastern tufted titmouse; Eavesdropping; Information; Predation risk

Indexed keywords

ALARM SIGNAL; BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY; DENSITY DEPENDENCE; MOBBING; PERCEPTION; PREDATION RISK; PREDATOR-PREY INTERACTION; RODENT; SONG; SONGBIRD;

AVES; HYLOCICHLA; MAMMALIA; PARUS BICOLOR; TAMIAS STRIATUS;

EID: 47649121768     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arn034     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Anne O, Rasa E. 1983. Dwarf mongoose and hornbill mutualism in the Taru desert, Kenya. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 12:181-190.
2. Blumstein DT, Steinmetz J, Armitage KB, Daniel JC. 1997. Alarm calling in yellow-bellied marmots: II. The importance of direct fitness. Anim Behav. 53:173-184.
3. Brown JS. 1988. Patch use as an indicator of habitat preference, predation risk and competition. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 22:37-47.
4. Brown JS. 1992. Patch use under predation risk: I. Models and predictions. Ann Zool Fenn. 29:301-309.
5. Brown JS, Kotler BP. 2004. Hazardous duty pay and the foraging cost of predation. Ecol Lett. 7:999-1014.
6. Brown JS, Kotler BP, Mitchell WA. 1994. Foraging theory, patch use, and the structure of a Negev Desert granivore community. Ecology. 75:2286-2300.
7. Conover WJ, Iman RL. 1981. Rank transformations as a bridge between parametric and nonparametric statistics. Am Stat. 35:124-129.
8. Dolby AS, Grubb TC Jr. 1998. Benefit to satellite members in mixed-species foraging groups: an experimental analysis. Anim Behav. 56:501-509.
9. Edelaar P, Wright J. 2006. Potential prey make excellent ornithologists: adaptive, flexible responses toward avian predation threat by Arabian Babblers Turdoides squamiceps living at a migratory hotspot. Ibis. 148:664-671.
10. Felts JW. 2007. The costs and benefits of ecological information. MS Thesis, Texas Tech University.
11. Goodale E, Kotagama SW. 2005. Testing the role of species in mixed-species bird flocks of a Sri Lankan rain forest. J Trop Ecol. 21:669-676.
12. Goodrich LJ, Crocoll SC, Senner SE. 1996. Broad-winged hawk (Buteo platypterus). In: Poole A, Gill F, editors. The birds of North America, no. 218. Philadelphia: The Academy of Natural Sciences.
13. Greene E, Meagher T. 1998. Red squirrels, Tamiasciurus hudsonicus, produce predator-class specific alarm calls. Anim Behav. 55:511.
14. Griffin AS, Savani RS, Hausman K, Lefebvre L. 2005. Mixed-species aggregations in birds: zenaida doves, Zenaida aurita, respond to the alarm calls of carib grackles, Quiscalus lugubris. Anim Behav. 70:507-515.
15. Hetrick SA. 2006. Investigation of tufted titmouse (Baeolophus bicolor) anti-predator vocalizations [MSc thesis]. [Gainesville (FL)]: University of Florida.
16. Howell S. 2006. When titmice give the alarm, cardinals listen: an experimental case of inter-specific functionally referential communication in wild birds [unpublished undergraduate honors thesis]. University of Florida.
17. Iwasa Y, Higashi M, Yamamura N. 1981. Prey distribution as a factor determining the choice of optimal foraging strategy. Am Nat. 117:710-723.
18. Kotler BP, Brown JS, Bouskila A. 2004. Apprehension and time allocation in gerbils: the effects of predatory risk and energetic state. Ecology. 85:917-922.
19. Kotler BP, Brown JS, Oldfield A, Thorson J, Cohen D. 2001. Foraging substrate and escape substrate: patch use by three species of gerbils. Ecology. 82:1781-1790.
20. Langham GM, Contreras TA, Sieving KE. 2006. Why pishing works: titmouse (Paridae) scolds elicit a generalized response in bird communities. Ecoscience. 13:485-496.
21. Lind J, Jöngren F, Nilsson J, Alm DS, Strandmark AL. 2005. Information, predation risk and foraging decisions during mobbing in great tit Parus major. Ornis Fenn. 82:89-96.
22. Macedonia JM, Evans SE. 1993. Variation among mammalian alarm call systems and the problem of meaning in animal signals. Ethology. 93:177-197.
23. Marler P. 1955. Characteristics of some animal calls. Nature. 176:6-8.
24. Marler P. 2005. Bird calls: a cornucopia for communication. In: Marler P, Slabbekoorn H, editors. Nature's music: the science of birdsong. San Diego (CA): Elsevier Academic Press. p. 132-177.
25. McGregor PK. 1993. Signaling in territorial systems - a context for individual identification, ranging, and eavesdropping. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 340:237-244.
26. Morton ES. 1977. On the occurrence and significance of motivation-structural rules in some bird and mammal sounds. Am Nat. 111:855-869.
27. Peake TM. 2005. Eavesdropping in communication networks. In: McGregor P, editor. Animal communication networks. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press. p. 13-37.
28. Rainey H, Zuberbühler JK, Slater PJB. 2004. Hornbills can distinguish between primate alarm calls. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 271:755-759.
29. Randler C. 2006. Red squirrels (Sciurus vulgaris) respond to alarm calls of Eurasian jays (Garrulus glandarius). Ethology. 112:411-416.
30. Schmidt KA, Brown JS. 1996. Patch assessment in fox squirrels: the role of resource density, patch size, and boundaries. Am Nat. 147:360-380.
31. Schmidt KA, Ostfeld RS. 2008. Eavesdropping squirrels reduce their future value of food under the perceived presence of cache-robbers. Am Nat. 171:386-393.
32. Searcy WA, Nowicki S. 2005. The evolution of animal communication. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.
33. Seyfarth RM, Cheney DL. 1986. Vocal development in vervet monkeys. Anim Behav. 34:1640-1658.
34. Sieving KE, Contreras TA, Maute KL. 2004. Heterospecific facilitation of forest-boundary crossing by mobbing understory birds in north-central Florida. Auk. 121:738-751.
35. Struthsaker TT. 1967. Auditory communication among vervet monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops). In: Altman SA, editor. Social communication among primates. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 281-324.
36. Sullivan KA. 1984. Information exploitation by downy woodpeckers in mixed-species flocks. Behaviour. 9:294-311.
37. Templeton CN, Greene E, Davis K. 2005. Allometry of alarm calls: black-capped chickadees encode information about predator size. Science. 308:1934-1937.
38. Valone TJ, Giraldeau LA. 1993. Patch estimation by group foragers: what information is used? Anim Behav. 45:721-728.
39. van der Veen IT. 2002. Seeing is believing: information about predators influences yellowhammer behaviour. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 51:466-471.
40. Verdolin JL. 2006. Meta-analysis of foraging and predation risk tradeoffs in terrestrial systems. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 60:457-464.
41. Whelan CJ, Maina GG. 2005. Effects of season, understorey vegetation density, habitat edge and tree diameter on patch-use by bark-foraging birds. Funct Ecol. 19:529-536.
42. Wiley RH. 1983. The evolution of communication. In: Slater PJB, Halliday TR, editors. Animal behaviour, vol. 2: communication. Oxford: Blackwell. p. 156-189.