Long-term effects of early parasite exposure on song duration and singing strategy in great tits

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 265-270

  Bischoff, Linda L ^a   Tschirren, Barbara ^b   Richner, Heinz ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BERN   (Switzerland)

^b LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Bird song; Developmental stress hypothesis; Ectoparasites; Honest signaling; Parus major; Sexual selection

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL RESPONSE; BIOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT; BREEDING POPULATION; ECTOPARASITE; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; FLEA; HONEST SIGNALING; HOST-PARASITE INTERACTION; NESTLING; PARASITE RESISTANCE; RECRUITMENT (POPULATION DYNAMICS); SEXUAL SELECTION; SONG; SONGBIRD;

AVES; CERATOPHYLLUS GALLINAE; PARUS MAJOR; SIPHONAPTERA (FLEAS);

EID: 64949123117     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arp012     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Baker MC, Bjerke TK, Lampe H, Espmark Y. 1986. Sexual-responses of female great tits to variation in size of males' song repertoires. Am Nat. 128:491-498.
2. Beecher MD, Campbell SE, Burt JM, Hill CE, Nordby JC. 2000. Song-type matching between neighbouring song sparrows. Anim Behav. 59:21-27.
3. Berg ML, Beintema NH, Welbergen JA, Komdeur J. 2005. Singing as a handicap: the effects of food availability and weather on song output in the Australian reed warbler Acrocephalus australis. J Avian Biol. 36:102-109.
4. Brackenbury JH. 1979. Power capabilities of the avian sound-producing system. J Exp Biol. 78:163-166.
5. Brindley EL. 1991. Response of European robins to playback of song - neighbour recognition and overlapping. Anim Behav. 41: 503-512.
6. Buchanan KL. 2000. Stress and the evolution of condition-dependent signals. Trends Ecol Evol. 15:156-160.
7. Buchanan KL, Catchpole CK. 2000. Song as an indicator of male parental effort in the sedge warbler. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 267:321-326.
8. Buchanan KL, Catchpole CK, Lewis JW, Lodge A. 1999. Song as an indicator of parasitism in the sedge warbler. Anim Behav. 57: 307-314.
9. Buchanan KL, Leitner S, Spencer KA, Goldsmith AR, Catchpole CK. 2004. Developmental stress selectively affects the song control nucleus HVC in the zebra finch. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 271:2381-2386.
10. Buchanan KL, Spencer KA, Goldsmith AR, Catchpole CK 2003. Song as an honest signal of past developmental stress in the European starling (Sturnus vulgaris). Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 270: 1149-1156.
11. Burley N. 1988. The differential-allocation hypothesis: an experimental test. Am Nat. 132:611-628.
12. Catchpole CK. 1982. The evolution of bird sounds in relation to mating and spacing behaviour. In: Kroodsma DE, Miller EH, editors. Acoustic communication in birds. New York: Academic Press. p. 297-319.
13. Catchpole CK 1996. Song and female choice: good genes and big brains? Trends Ecol Evol. 11:358-360.
14. Catchpole CK, Slater PJB. 1995. Bird song. Biological themes and variations. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press.
15. Charif RA, Clark CW, Firstrup KM. 2004. Raven 1.2, Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY.
16. Collins SA, Hubbard C, Houtman AM. 1994. Female mate choice in the zebra finch - the effect of male beak color and male song. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 35:21-25.
17. Dabelsteen T, McGregor PK, Holland J, Tobias JA, Pedersen SB. 1997. The signal function of overlapping singing in male robins. Anim Behav. 53:249-256.
18. Dabelsteen T, McGregor PK, Shepherd M, Whittaker X, Pedersen SB. 1996. Is the signal value of overlapping different from that of alternating during matched singing in great tits? J Avian Biol. 27: 189-194.
19. Darwin C. 1871. The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. London: Murray.
20. Doutrelant C, Blondel J, Perret P, Lambrechts MM. 2000. Relationship between song repertoire size and male quality in blue tits. J Avian Biol. 31:360-366.
21. Eberhardt LS. 1994. Oxygen-consumption during singing by male carolina wrens (Thryothorus ludovicianus). Auk. 111:124-130.
22. Garamszegi LZ, Møller AP. 2004. Extrapair paternity and the evolution of bird song. Behav Ecol. 15:508-519.
23. Gaunt AS, Bucher TL, Gaunt SLL, Baptista LF. 1996. Is singing costly? Auk. 113:718-721.
24. Gil D, Gahr M. 2002. The honesty of bird song: multiple constraints for multiple traits. Trends Ecol Evol. 17:133-141.
25. Gil D, Leboucher G, Lacroix A, Cue R, Kreutzer M. 2004. Female canaries produce eggs with greater amounts of testosterone when exposed to preferred male song. Horm Behav. 45:64-70.
26. Gil D, Naguib M, Riebel K, Rutstein A, Gahr M. 2006. Early condition, song learning, and the volume of song brain nuclei in the zebra finch (Taeniopygia guttata). J Neurobiol. 66:1602-1612.
27. Grafen A 1990. Biological signals as handicaps. J Theor Biol. 144: 517-546.
28. Hamilton WD, Zuk M. 1982. Heritable true fitness and bright birds - a role for parasites. Science. 218:384-387.
29. Houtman AM. 1992. Female zebra finches choose extra-pair copulations with genetically attractive males. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 249:3-6.
30. Hyman J, Hughes M, Searcy WA, Nowicki S. 2004. Individual variation in the strength of territory defense in male song sparrows: correlates of age, territory tenure, and neighbor aggressiveness. Behaviour. 141:15-27.
31. Krebs JR. 1976. Habituation and song repertoires in great tit. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 1:215-227.
32. Krebs JR, Ashcroft R, Vanorsdol K 1981. Song matching in the great tit Parus major L., Anim Behav. 29:918-923.
33. Kunc HP, Amrhein V, Naguib M. 2006. Vocal interactions in nightingales, Luscinia megarhynchos: more aggressive males have higher pairing success. Anim Behav. 72:25-30.
34. Kwok L. 2003. Sound Studio 2.1. Felt Tip Inc., Brooklyn, NY. Lambrechts M, Dhondt AA. 1986. Male quality, reproduction, and survival in the great tit (Parus major). Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 19:57-63.
35. Lambrechts M, Dhondt AA. 1988. The anti-exhaustion hypothesis - a new hypothesis to explain song performance and song switching in the great tit. Anim Behav. 36:327-334.
36. Langemann U, Tavares JP, Peake TM, McGregor PK 2000. Response of great tits to escalating patterns of playback. Behaviour. 137: 451-471.
37. McGregor PK, Dabelsteen T, Shepherd M, Pedersen SB. 1992. The signal value of matched singing in great tits - evidence from interactive playback experiments. Anim Behav. 43:987-998.
38. McGregor PK, Krebs JR. 1982a. Mating and song types in the great tit. Nature. 297:60-61.
39. McGregor PK Krebs JR. 1982b. Song types in a population of great tits (Parus major) - their distribution, abundance and acquisition by individuals. Behaviour. 79:126-152.
40. McGregor PK Krebs JR, Perrins CM. 1981. Song repertoires and lifetime reproductive success in the great tit (Parus major). Am Nat. 118:149-159.
41. Mennill DJ, Ratcliffe LM. 2004a. Do male black-capped chickadees eavesdrop on song contests? A multi-speaker playback experiment. Behaviour. 141:125-139.
42. Mennill DJ, Ratcliffe LM. 2004b. Overlapping and matching in the song contests of black-capped chickadees. Anim Behav. 67:441-450.
43. Miyazaki M, Waas JR. 2002. 'Last word' effects of male advertising calls on female preference in little blue penguins. Behaviour. 139:1413-1423.
44. Naguib M, Fichtel C, Todt D. 1999. Nightingales respond more strongly to vocal leaders of simulated dyadic interactions. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 266:537-542.
45. Nielsen BMB, Vehrencamp SL. 1995. Responses of song sparrows to song-type matching via interactive playback. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 37:109-117.
46. Nowicki S, Hasselquist D, Bensch S, Peters S. 2000. Nestling growth and song repertoire sire in great reed warblers: evidence for song learning as an indicator mechanism in mate choice. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 267:2419-2424.
47. Nowicki S, Peters S, Podos J. 1998. Song learning, early nutrition and sexual selection in songbirds. Am Zool. 38:179-190.
48. Nowicki S, Searcy WA. 2004. Song function and the evolution of female preferences - why birds sing, why brains matter. Ann NY Acad Sci. 1016:704-723.
49. Nowicki S, Searcy WA, Peters S. 2002. Brain development, song learning and mate choice in birds: a review and experimental test of the "nutritional stress hypothesis". J Comp Physiol A. 188:1003-1014.
50. Osiejuk TS, Ratynska K, Cygan JP. 2004. Signal value of alternating and overlapping singing in the yellowhammer Emberiza citrinella. J Ethol. 22:55-61.
51. Osiejuk TS, Ratynska K, Cygan JP. 2007. Corn bunting (Miliaria calandra) males respond differently to alternating and overlapping playback of song. J Ethol. 25:159-168.
52. Otter K, McGregor PK, Terry AMR, Burford FRL, Peake TM, Dabels-teen T. 1999. Do female great tits (Parus major) assess males by eavesdropping? A field study using interactive song playback. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 266:1305-1309.
53. Peake TM, Matessi G, McGregor PK, Dabelsteen T. 2005. Song type matching, song type switching and eavesdropping in male great tits. Anim Behav. 69:1063-1068.
54. Richner H, Oppliger A, Christe P. 1993. Effect of an ectoparasite on reproduction in great tits. J Anim Ecol. 62:703-710.
55. Sall J, Lehmann A 1996. JMP start statistics. New York: Duxbury Press.
56. Scheuber H, Jacot A, Brinkhof MWG. 2003a. Condition dependence of a multicomponent sexual signal in the field cricket Gryllus campestris. Anim Behav. 65:721-727.
57. Scheuber H, Jacot A, Brinkhof MWG. 2003b. The effect of past condition on a multicomponent sexual signal. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 270:1779-1784.
58. Searcy WA, Andersson M. 1986. Sexual selection and the evolution of song. Annu Rev Ecol Syst. 17:507-533.
59. Sheldon BC. 2000. Differential allocation: test, mechanisms and implications. Trends Ecol Evol. 15:397-402.
60. Spencer KA, Buchanan KL, Goldsmith AR, Catchpole CK. 2003. Song as an honest signal of developmental stress in the zebra finch (Taeniopygia guttata). Horm Behav. 44:132-139.
61. Spencer KA, Buchanan KL, Goldsmith AR, Catchpole CK. 2004. Developmental stress, social rank and song complexity in the European starling (Stumus vulgaris). Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 271: S121-S123.
62. Spencer KA, Buchanan KL, Leitner S, Goldsmith AR, Catchpole CK. 2005. Parasites affect song complexity and neural development in a songbird. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 272:2037-2043.
63. Spencer KA, Wimpenny JH, Buchanan KL, Lovell PG, Goldsmith AR, Catchpole CK. 2005. Developmental stress affects the attractiveness of male song and female choice in the zebra finch (Taeniopygia guttata). Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 58:423-428.
64. Todt D. 1981. On functions of vocal matching - effect of counter-replies on song post choice and singing. Z Tierpsychol. 57:73-93.
65. Todt D, Naguib M. 2000. Vocal interactions in birds: the use of song as a model in communication. Adv Study Behav. 29:247-296.
66. Tripet F, Richner H. 1997. The coevolutionary potential of a 'general-ist' parasite, the hen flea Ceratophyllus gallinae. Parasitology. 115: 419-427.
67. Vehrencamp SL. 2001. Is song-type matching a conventional signal of aggressive intentions? Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 268: 1637-1642.
68. Vehrencamp SL, Bradbury JW, Gibson RM. 1989. The energetic cost of display in male sage grouse. Anim Behav. 38:885-896.