Group size effect caused by food competition in nutmeg mannikins (Lonchura punctulata)

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 421-425

  Rieucau, Guillaume ^a   Giraldeau, Luc Alain ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DU QUÉBEC À MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Competition; Group size effect; Lonchura punctulata; Nutmeg mannikins; Video playback

Indexed keywords

ANTIPREDATOR DEFENSE; FORAGING BEHAVIOR; GROUP SIZE; INTRASPECIFIC COMPETITION; PASSERINE; PREDATION RISK; SIZE EFFECT;

ANIMALIA; AVES; LONCHURA PUNCTULATA; MYRISTICA FRAGRANS;

EID: 64949172192     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arn144     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Addessi E, Visalberghi E. 2001. Social facilitation of eating novel food in tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella): input provided by group members and responses affected in the observer. Anim Cogn. 4:297-303.
2. Adret P. 1997. Discrimination of video-images by zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata): direct evidence from song performance. J Comp Psychol. 111:115-125.
3. Beauchamp G. 2003. Group-size effects on vigilance: a search for mechanisms. Behav Processes. 63:111-121.
4. Beauchamp G, Livoreil B. 1997. The effect of group size on vigilance and feeding rate in spice finches (Lonchura punctulata). Can J Zool. 75:1526-1531.
5. Beauchamp G, Ruxton GD. 2003. Changes in vigilance with group size under scramble competition. Am Nat. 161:672-675.
6. Bednekoff PA. 2003. Testing explanations of the group size effect on vigilance: let's be direct. Behav Processes. 63:135-136.
7. Bolyard KJ, Rowland WJ. 1996. Context-dependent response to red coloration in stickleback. Anim Behav. 52:923-927.
8. Clark CW, Mangel M. 1986. The evolutionary advantages of group foraging. J Theor Biol. 30:45-75.
9. Clark DL, Macedonia JM, Rosenthal GG. 1997. Testing video playback to lizards in the field. Copeia. 2:421-423.
10. Dittrich WH, Lea SEG. 1993. Motion as a natural category for pigeons: generalisation and a feature-positive effect. J Exp Anal Behav. 59:115-129.
11. Elgar MA. 1989. Predator vigilance and group size in mammals and birds: a critical review of the empirical evidence. Biol Rev. 64:13-33.
12. Elgar MA, Catterall CP. 1981. Flocking and predator surveillance in house sparrows: test of an hypothesis. Anim Behav. 29:868-872.
13. Evans CS, Macedonia JM, Marler P. 1993. Effects of apparent size and speed on the response of chickens, Gallus gallus, to computer-generated simulations of aerial predators. Anim Behav. 46:1-11.
14. Gauvin S, Giraldeau LA. 2004. Nutmeg mannikins (Lonchura punctulata) reduce their feeding rates in response to simulated competition. Oecologia. 139:150-156.
15. Giraldeau LA, Hogan JA, Clinchy MJ. 1990. The payoffs to producing and scrounging: what happens when patches are divisible? Ethology. 85:132-146.
16. Grand TC, Dill LM. 1999. The effect of group size on the foraging behaviour of juvenile coho salmon: reduction of predation risk or increased competition? Anim Behav. 58:443-451.
17. Lima SL. 1990. The influence of models on the interpretation of vigilance. In: Bekoff M, Jamieson D, editors. Interpretation and explanation in the study of animal behavior: vol. 2. Explanation, evolution and adaptation. Boulder (CO): Westview Press. p. 246-267.
18. Lima SL. 1995. Back to the basics of anti-predatory vigilance: the group-size effect. Anim Behav. 49:11-20.
19. Lima SL, Dill LM. 1990. Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. Can J Zool. 68:619-640.
20. Lima SL, Zollner PA, Bednekoff PA. 1999. Predation, scramble competition, and the vigilance group size effect in dark-eyed juncos (Junco hyemalis). Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 46:110-116.
21. McDonald CG, Reimchen TE, Hawryshyn CW. 1995. Nuptial colour loss and signal masking in Gasterosteus: an analysis using video imaging. Behaviour. 132:963-977.
22. McGregor PK. 2000. Playback experiments: design and analysis. Acta Ethol. 3:3-8.
23. McNamara JM, Houston AI. 1992. Evolutionarily stable levels of vigilance as a function of group size. Anim Behav. 43:641-658.
24. McQuoid LM, Galef BG. 1993. Social stimuli influencing feeding behaviour of Burmese fowl: a video analysis. Anim Behav. 46:13-22.
25. Ord TJ, Peters RA, Evans CS, Taylor AJ. 2002. Digital video playback and visual communication in lizards. Anim Behav. 63:879-890.
26. Plimpton EH, Swartz KB, Rosenblum LA. 1981. Responses of juvenile bonnet macaques to social stimuli presented through color videotapes. Dev Psychobiol. 14:109-115.
27. Pulliam HR. 1973. On the advantages of flocking. J Theor Biol. 38:419-429.
28. Randler C. 2005. Coots Fulica atra reduce their vigilance under increased competition. Behav Processes. 68:173-178.
29. Roberts G. 1996. Why individual vigilance declines as group size increases? Anim Behav. 51:1077-1086.
30. Rosenthal GG, Evans CS, Miller WL. 1996. Female preference for dynamic traits in the green swordtail Xiphophorus helleri. Anim Behav. 51:811-820.
31. Valone TJ. 1993. Patch estimation: a cost of group foraging. Oikos. 68:258-266.
32. Vásquez RA, Kacelnik A 2000. Foraging rate versus sociality in the starling Sturnus vulgaris. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 267:157-164.