Innate and learned components of defence by flickers against a novel nest competitor, the European starling

Ethology

Volumn 110, Issue 10, 2004, Pages 779-791

  Wiebe, Karen L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTIPREDATOR DEFENSE; INNATE BEHAVIOR; INTRODUCED SPECIES; LEARNING; NEST GUARDING; PREDATOR-PREY INTERACTION;

NORTH AMERICA; WESTERN HEMISPHERE; WORLD;

AVES; COLAPTES; COLAPTES AURATUS; STURNIDAE; STURNUS; STURNUS VULGARIS;

EID: 7244248735     PISSN: 01791613     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0310.2004.01016.x     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Aitken, K. E. H., Wiebe, K. L. & Martin, K. 2002: Nest site reuse patterns for a cavity-nesting bird community in interior British Columbia. Auk 119, 391-402.
2. Alcock, J. 1993: Animal Behaviour, 5th edn. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA.
3. Andersson, M., Wiklund, G. & Rundgren, H. 1980: Parental defence of offspring: a model and and example. Anim. Behav. 28, 536-542.
4. Briskie, J. V., Sealy, S. G. & Hobson, K. A. 1992: Behavioral defenses against avian brood parasitism in sympatric and allopatric host populations. Evolution 46, 334-340.
5. Cabe, P. R. 1993: European starling (Sturnus vulgaris). In: The Birds of North America, no. 48 (Poole, A. & Gill, F., eds). Academy of Natural Science, Philadelphia, PA and The American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, DC, pp. 1-24.
6. Conover, M. R. 1987: Acquisition of predator information by active and passive mobbers in ring-billed gull colonies. Behaviour 102, 41-57.
7. Curio, E. 1975: The functional organisation of anti-predator behaviour in the pied flycatcher: a study of avian visual perception. Anim. Behav. 23, 1-115.
8. Curio, E. 1988: Cultural transmission of enemy recognition in birds. In: Social Learning: Psychological and Biological Perspectives (Zentall, T. R. & Galef, B. G., eds). Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 75-97.
9. Curio, E. 1993: Proximate and developmental aspects of antipredator behavior. Adv. Study Behav. 22, 1135-1238.
10. Dale, S., Gustavsen, R. & Slagsvold, T. 1996: Risk taking during parental care: a test of three hypotheses applied to the pied flycatcher. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 39, 31-42.
11. Dijkstra, C., Bult, A., Bijlsma, S., Daan, S., Meijer, T. & Zijlstra, M. 1990: Brood size manipulation in the kestrel (Falco tinnunculus): effects on offspring and parental survival. J. Anim. Ecol. 59, 269-285.
12. Dobkin, D. S., Rich, A. C., Pretare, J. A. & Pyle, W. H. 1995: Nest-site relationships among cavity-nesting birds of riparian and snowpocket aspen woodlands in the northwestern Great Basin. Condor 97, 694-707.
13. Elchuk, C. L. 2002: Home range, territoriality and foraging site selection of the northern flicker (Colaptes auratus). MSc Thesis, Univ. of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.
14. Gill, S. A. & Sealy, S. G. 1996: Nest defence by yellow warblers: recognition of a brood parasite and an avian nest predator. Behaviour 133, 263-282.
15. Greig-Smith, P. W. 1980: Parental investment in nest defence by stonechats (Saxicola torquata). Anim. Behav. 48, 843-849.
16. Griffin, A. S., Blumstein, D. T. & Evans, C. S. 2000: Training captive bred and translocated animals to avoid predators. Conserv. Biol. 14, 1317-1326.
17. Griffin, A. S., Evans, C. S. & Blumstein, D. T. 2001: Learning specificity in acquired predator recognition. Anim. Behav. 62, 577-589.
18. Hakkarainen, H. & Korpimäki, E. 1994: Nest defence of Tengmalm's Owls reflects offspring survival prospects under fluctuating food conditions. Anim. Behav. 48, 843-849.
19. Hobson, K. A. & Villard, M. 1998: Forest fragmentation affects the behavioral response of American redstarts to the threat of cowbird parasitism. Condor 100, 389-394.
20. Hobson, K. A., Bouchart, M. L. & Sealy, S. G. 1988: Responses of naive yellow warblers to a novel nest predator. Anim. Behav. 36, 1823-1830.
21. Ingold, D. J. 1989: Nesting phenology and competition for nest sites among red-headed and red-bellied woodpeckers. Auk 60, 90-91.
22. Ingold, D. J. 1994: Influence of nest-site competition between European starlings and woodpeckers. Wilson Bull. 106, 227-241.
23. Ingold, D. J. 1998: The influence of starlings on flicker reproduction when both naturally excavated cavities and artificial nest boxes are available. Wilson Bull. 110, 218-225.
24. Kerpez, T. A. & Smith, N. S. 1990: Competition between European starlings and native woodpeckers for nest cavities in saguaros. Auk 107, 367-375.
25. Kessel, B. 1953: Distribution and migration of the European starling in North America. Condor 55, 49-67.
26. Knight, R. L. & Temple, S. A. 1986a: Nest defence in the American goldfinch. Anim. Behav. 34, 887-897.
27. Knight, R. L. & Temple, S. A. 1986b: Methodological problems in studies of avian nest defence. Anim. Behav. 34, 561-566.
28. Komdeur, J. & Kats, R. K. H. 1999: Predation risk affects trade-off between nest guarding and foraging in Seychelles warblers. Behav. Ecol. 10, 648-658.
29. Kullberg, C. & Lind, J. 2002: An experimental study of predator recognition in great tit fledglings. Ethology 108, 429-441.
30. Magurran, A. E. 1990: The inheritance and development of anti-predator behaviour. Anim. Behav. 50, 1193-1201.
31. Major, R. E. & Kendal, C. E. 1996: The contribution of artificial nest experiments to understanding avian reproductive success: a review of the methods and conclusions. Ibis 138, 298-307.
32. Maloney, R. F. & McLean, I. G. 1995: Historical and experimental learned predator recognition in free-living New Zealand robins. Anim. Behav. 50, 1193-1201.
33. Martin, T. E. 1992: Interaction of nest predation and food limitation in reproductive strategies. Curr. Ornithol. 9, 163-197.
34. Martin, K. & Eadie, J. M. 1999: Nest webs: a community-wide approach to the management and conservation of cavity-nesting forest birds. Forest Ecol. Manage. 115, 243-257.
35. Martin, K., Aitken, K. E. H. & Wiebe, K. L. 2004: Nest sites and nest webs for cavity-nesting communities in Interior British Columbia, Canada: nest characteristics and niche partitioning. Condor 106, 5-19.
36. McLean, I. G. & Rhodes, G. 1991: Enemy recognition and response in birds. Curr. Ornithol. 8, 173-211.
37. Montgomerie, R. D. & Weatherhead, P. J. 1988: Risks and rewards of nest defence by parent birds. Q. Rev. Biol. 63, 167-187.
38. Moore, W. S. 1995: Northern flicker (Colaptes auratus). In: The Birds of North America, no. 166 (Poole, A. & Gill, F. B., eds). Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, PA and American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, DC, pp. 1-28.
39. Munro, J. A. 1956: Starling at Vanderhoof, British Columbia. Auk 73, 130.
40. Neudorf, D. L. & Sealy, S. G. 1992: Reactions of four passerines to threats of predation and cowbird parasitism: enemy recognition or generalized responses? Behaviour 128, 84-105.
41. Nur, N. 1988: The consequences of brood size for breeding blue tits III. Measuring the costs of reproduction: survival, fecundity and differential dispersal. Evolution 42, 351-362.
42. Owings, D. H. & Coss, R. G. 1977: Snake mobbing by California ground squirrels: adaptive variation and ontogeny. Behaviour 62, 50-69.
43. Pianka, R. P. & Parker, W. S. 1975: Age-specific reproductive tactics. Am. Nat. 109, 453-464.
44. Pyle, P. 1997: Identification Guide to North American Birds. Slate Creek Press, Bolinas, CA.
45. Regelmann, K. & Curio, E. 1983: Determinants of brood defence in the great tit Parus major L. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 13, 131-145.
46. Robbins, C. S., Bystrak, D. & Geissler, P. H. 1986: The Breeding Bird Surveys: its First Fifteen Years, 1965-1979. U.S. Fish Wild. Serv. Resource Publ. 157, Washington, DC.
47. Scott, V. E. & Oldmeyer, J. L. 1983: Cavity-nesting bird requirements and responses to snag cutting in ponderosa pine. In: Snag Habitat Management Proceedings of the Symposium (Davis, J. W., Goodwin, G. A. & Ockenfels, R. A. eds). U.S. For. Serv. Tech. Rep. RM-99, Washington, DC, pp. 1-112.
48. Smith, J. N. M., Arcese, P. & McLean, I. G. 1984: Age, sex and enemy recognition by wild song sparrows. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 14, 101-106.
49. Thornhill, R. 1989: Nest defense by red junglefowl (Gallus gallus) hens: the roles of renesting potential, parental experience and brood reproductive value. Ethology 83, 31-42.
50. Tinbergen, N. 1951: The Study of Instinct. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK.
51. Veen, T., Richardson, D. S., Blaakmeer, K. & Komdeur, J. 2000: Experimental evidence for innate predator recognition in the Seychelles warbler. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 267, 2253-2258.
52. Walters, J. R. 1982: Parental behavior in lapwings (Charadriidae) and its relationship with clutch sizes and mating systems. Evolution 36, 1030-1040.
53. Weitzel, N. H. 1988: Nest-site competition between European starlings and native breeding birds in northwestern Nevada. Condor 90, 515-517.
54. Wiebe, K. L. 2000: Assortative mating by color within a population of hybrid Northern flickers. Auk 117, 525-529.
55. Wiebe, K. L. 2003: Delayed timing as a strategy to avoid nest-site competition: testing a model using data from starlings and flickers. Oikos 100, 291-298.
56. Wiebe, K. L. & Swift, T. L. 2001: Clutch size relative to nest size in Northern flickers using tree cavities. J. Avian Biol. 32, 167-173.
57. Winkler, D. W. 1992: Causes and consequences of variation in parental defense behavior by tree swallow. Condor 94, 502-520.