Vigilance and predator detection vary between avian species with different visual acuity and coverage

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 20, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 936-945

  Tisdale, Vanessa ^a   Fernández Juricic, Esteban ^b  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Predator detection; Vigilance; Visual acuity; Visual ecology; Visual fields

Indexed keywords

ANTIPREDATOR DEFENSE; INTERSPECIFIC VARIATION; LIFE HISTORY TRAIT; PASSERINE; PREDATION RISK; VIGILANCE; VISION;

AVES; PASSER DOMESTICUS; STURNUS VULGARIS;

EID: 70349459775     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arp080     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Adobe Systems, Inc. 2004. San Jose (CA): Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5.
2. Anderson TR. 2006. Biology of the ubiquitous house sparrow: From genes to populations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3. Ballerini M, Cabibbo N, Candelier R, Cavagna A, Cisbani E, Giardina I, Lecomte A, Orlandi A, Parisi G, Procaccini A, et al. 2008. Interaction ruling animal collective behavior depends on topological rather than metric distance: Evidence from a field study. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 105:1232-1237.
4. Bednekoff PA, Lima SL. 1998a. Randomness, chaos, and confusion in the study of anti-predator vigilance. Trends Ecol Evol. 13:284-287.
5. Bednekoff PA, Lima SL. 1998b. Re-examining safety in numbers: Interactions between risk dilution and collective detection depend upon predator targeting behavior. Proc R Soc Lond. 265:2021-2026.
6. Bednekoff PA, Lima SL. 2005. Testing for peripheral vigilance: Do birds value what they see when not overtly vigilant? Anim Behav. 69:1165-1171.
7. Blumstein DT, Daniel JC, Evans CS. 2006. JWatcher 1.0. Available from: Http://galliform.psy.mq.edu.au/jwatcher/.
8. Blumstein DT, Fernandez-Juricic E, Zollner PA, Garity SC. 2005. Interspecific variation in avian responses to human disturbance. J Appl Ecol. 42:943-953.
9. Cabe PR. 1993. European Starling (Sturnus vulgaris). In: Poole A, editor. The birds of North America online. Ithaca (NY): Cornell LabofOrnithology. RetrievedfromtheBirds ofNorthAmericaOnline: Http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/ species/048. doi:10.2173/bna.48.
10. Carere C, Montanino S, Moreschini F, Zoratto F, Chiarotti F, Santucci D, Alleva E. 2009. Aerial flocking patterns of wintering starlings, Sturnus vulgaris, under different predation risk. Anim Behav. 77:101-107.
11. Cowlishaw G, Lawes ML, 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.
12. 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.
13. Dall SRX, Giraldeau L-A, Olsson O, McNamara JM, Stephens DW. 2005. Information and its use by animals in evolutionary ecology. Trends Ecol Evol. 20:187-193.
14. 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.
15. Devereux CL, Whittingham MJ, Fernandez-Juricic E, Vickery JA, Krebs JR. 2006. Predator detection and avoidance by starlings under differing scenarios of predation risk. Behav Ecol. 17:303-309.
16. Dukas R, Kamil AC. 2000. The cost of limited attention in blue jays. Behav Ecol. 11:502-506.
17. Elgar MA. 1989. Predator vigilance and group size in mammals and birds. Biol Rev. 64:13-33.
18. Fernandez-Juricic E, Erichsen JT, Kalcenik A. 2004. Visual perception and social foraging in birds. Trends Ecol Evol. 19:25-31.
19. Fernandez-Juricic E, Gall MD, Dolan T, Tisdale V, Martin GR. 2008. The visual fields of two ground foraging birds, house finches and house sparrows, allow for simultaneous foraging and anti-predator vigilance. Ibis. 150:779-787.
20. Fernandez-Juricic E, Schroeder N. 2003. Do variations in scanning behavior affect tolerance to human disturbance? Appl Anim Behav Sci. 84:219-234.
21. Fernandez-Juricic E, Smith R, Kalcenik A. 2005. Increasing the costs of conspecific scanning in socially foraging starlings affects vigilance and foraging behavior. Anim Behav. 69:73-81.
22. Fernandez-Juricic E, Tran E. 2007. Changes in vigilance and foraging behaviour with light intensity and their effects on food intake and predator detection in house finches. Anim Behav. 74:1381-1390.
23. Gluck E. 1987. An experimental study of feeding, vigilance and predator avoidance in a single bird. Oecologia. 71:268-272.
24. Guillemain M, Duncan P, Fritz H. 2001. Switching to a feeding method that obstructs vision increases head-up vigilance in dabbling ducks. J Avian Biol. 32:345-350.
25. Guillemain M, Martin GR, Fritz H. 2002. Feeding methods, visual fields and vigilance in dabbling ducks (Anatidae). Funct Ecol. 16:522-529.
26. Harkin EL, van Dongen WFD, Herberstein ME, Elgar MA. 2000. The influence of visual obstructions on the vigilance and escape behaviour of house sparrows, Passer domesticus. Aust J Zool. 48:259-263.
27. Hart NS. 2001. Variations in cone photoreceptor abundance and the visual ecology of birds. J. Comp Physiol A. 187:685-698.
28. Hart NS, Hunt DM. 2007. Avian visual pigments: Characteristics, spectral tuning, and evolution. Am Nat. 169:S7-S26.
29. Johnson CA, Giraldeau L-A, Grant JWA. 2001. The effect of handling time on. interference among house sparrows foraging at different seed densities. Behaviour. 138:597-614.
30. Kaby U, Lind J. 2003. What limits predator detection in blue tits (Parus caeruleus): Posture, task or orientation? Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 54:534-538.
31. Kiltie RA. 2000. Scaling of visual acuity with body size in mammals and birds. Funct Ecol. 14:226-234.
32. Laseiwski RC, Dawson WR. 1967. A re-examination of the relation between standard metabolic rate and body weight in birds. Condor. 69:13-23.
33. Lazarus J, Symonds M. 1992. Contrasting effects of protective and obstructive cover on avian vigilance. Anim Behav. 43:519-521.
34. Lima SL. 1987. Distance to cover, visual obstructions, and vigilance in house sparrows. Behaviour. 102:231-238.
35. Lima SL. 1995. Collective detection of predatory attack by social foragers: Fraught with ambiguity? Anim Behav. 50:1097-1108.
36. Lima SL, Bednekoff PA. 1999. Back to the basics of antipredatory vigilance: Can nonvigilant animals detect attack? AnimBehav. 58:537-543.
37. Lowther PE, Cink CL. 2006. House sparrow (Passer domesticus). In: Poole A, editor. The birds of North America Online. Ithaca (NY): Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the birds of North America online: Http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/012. doi:10.2173/bna.12.
38. 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. 159:545-557.
39. Martin GR. 2007. Visual fields and their function in birds. J Ornithol. 148:S547-S562.
40. Phelps SM. 2007. Sensory ecology and perceptual allocation: New prospects for neural networks. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B. 362:355-367.
41. Popp JW. 1988. Effects of food-handling time on scanning rates among American goldfinches. Auk. 105:384-385.
42. Quinn JL, Cresswell W. 2005. Escape response delays in wintering redshank, Tringa tetanus, flocks: Perceptual limits and economic decisions. Anim Behav. 69:1285-1292.
43. Quirici V, Castro RA, Oyarzun J, Ebensperger LA. 2008. Female degus (Octodon degus) monitor their environment while foraging socially. Anim Cogn. 11:441-448.
44. Reymond L. 1987. Spatial visual acuity of the eagle Aquila audax: A behavioural, optical and anatomical investigation. Vision Res. 25:1477-1491.
45. Smith DF, Laitvaitis JA. 1999. Differences in the eye size and predator detection distance of New England and eastern cottontails. Northeast Wildl. 54:55-60.
46. Smith R. 2002. Together for better or worse: Why starlings forage in groups. PhD thesis. United Kingdom: University of Oxford. StatSoft, Inc. 2007. Electronic Statistics Textbook. Tulsa (OK): StatSoft. Available from: Http://www.statsoft.com/textbook/stathome.html.
47. Templeton JJ, Giraldeau L. 1995. Patch assessment in foraging flocks of European starlings: Evidence for the use of public information. Behav Ecol. 6:65-72.
48. Valone TJ. 2007. From eavesdropping on performance to copying the behavior of others: A review of public information use. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 62:1-14.
49. Watson M, Aebischer NJ, Cresswell W. 2007. Vigilance and fitness in grey partridges Perdix perdix: The effects of group size and foragingvigilance trade-offs on predation mortality. J Anim Ecol. 76:211-221.
50. Whitehead SC, Wright JW, 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.
51. Whittingham MJ, Butler SJ, Quinn JL, Cresswell 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.