Effects of singing on copulation success and egg production in brown-headed cowbirds, Molothrus ater

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 211-218

  White, David J ^a   King, Andrew P ^b   West, Meredith J ^b   Gros Louis, Julie ^c   Tuttle, Elaina M ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c E11 SSH   (United States)

^d INDIANA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Birdsong; Cowbird; Egg production; Reproductive success; Social behavior

Indexed keywords

BREEDING SEASON; COPULATION; EGG PRODUCTION; REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; SONGBIRD;

AVES; MOLOTHRUS; MOLOTHRUS ATER;

EID: 76749121843     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arp178     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Adkins-Regan E, Mackillop EA. 2003. Japanese quail (Coturnix japon-ica) inseminations are more likely to fertilize eggs in a context predicting mating opportunities. Proc R Soc Lond B. 270:1685-1689.
2. Alatalo RV, Glynn C, Lundberg A. 1990. Singing rate and female attraction in the pied flycatcher-an experiment. Anim Behav. 39: 601-603.
3. Alderson GW, Gibbs HL, Sealy SG. 1999. Parentage and kinship studies in an obligate brood parasitic bird, the brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater), using microsatellite DNA markers. J Hered. 90: 182-190.
4. Andersson M. 1994. Sexual selection. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.
5. Baicich PJ, Harrison CJO. 1997. A guide to the nests, eggs, and nestlings of North American birds. San Diego (CA): Academic Press.
6. Baker MC, Boylan JT. 1999. Singing behavior, mating associations and reproductive success in a population of hybridizing Lazuli and Indigo Buntings. Condor. 101:493-504.
7. Beecher MD. 1996. Birdsong learning in the laboratory and field. In: Kroodsma DE, Miller EH, editors. Ecology and evolution of acoustic communication in birds. Cornell University Press. p. 61-78.
8. Beecher MD, Campbell SE, Burt JM, Hill CE, Nordby JC. 2000. Song-type matching between neighbouring song sparrows. Anim Behav. 59:21-27.
9. Bradbury JW, Vehrencamp SL. 1998. Principles of animal communication. Sunderland (MA): Sinauer Associates.
10. Brainard P. 1998. Variability in the mating systems of parasitic birds. In: Rothstein SI, Robinson SF, editors. Parasitic birds and their hosts. Oxford: Oxford.
11. Brockway BF. 1965. Stimulation of ovarian development and egg laying by male courtship vocalization in budgerigars (Melopsittacus Undulatus). Anim Behav. 13:575-578.
12. Carey C. 1996. Avian energetics and nutritional ecology. New York: Chapman & Hall.
13. Catchpole CK. 1987. Bird song, sexual selection and female choice. Trends Ecol Evol. 2:94-97.
14. Catchpole CK, Slater PJB. 1995. Bird song: biological themes and variations. Cambridge (MA): Cambridge University Press.
15. Darley JA. 1971. Sex ratio and mortality in the brown-headed cowbird. Auk. 88:560-566.
16. Dawson RJG, Gibbs HL, Hobson KA, Yezerinac SM. 1997. Isolation of microsatellite DNA markers from a passerine bird, the yellow warbler Dendroica petechia, and their use in population studies. Heredity. 78:506-514.
17. Dufty AM Jr. 1986. Singing and the establishment and maintenance of dominance hierarchies in captive brown-headed cowbirds. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 19:49-55.
18. Freeberg TM. 1996. Assortative mating in captive cowbirds is predicted by social experience. Anim Behav. 52:1129-1142.
19. Freeberg TM, King AP, West MJ. 1995. Social malleability in cowbirds (Molothrus ater atremisiae): species and mate recognition in the first two years of life. J Comp Psychol. 109:357-367.
20. Freeberg TM, King AP, West MJ. 2001. Cultural transmission of vocal traditions in cowbirds (Molothrus ater) influences courtship patterns and mate preferences. J Compar Psychol. 115:201-211.
21. Freed-Brown G, White DJ. 2009. Acoustic mate copying: female cow-birds attend to other females' vocalizations to modify their song preferences. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 276:3319-3325.
22. Friedmann H. 1929. The cowbirds: a study in the biology of social parasitism. Springfield (IL): C.C. Thomas.
23. Gill FB. 1994. Ornithology. 2nd. ed. New York: WH Freeman & Co.
24. Holveck MJ, Riebel K. 2007. Preferred songs predict preferred males: consistency and repeatability of zebra finch females across three test contexts. Anim Behav. 74:297-309.
25. Howard RD. 1974. The influence of sexual selection and interspecific competition on mockingbird song (Mimus polyglottos). Evolution. 28:428-438.
26. King AP, West MJ. 1977. Species identification in the North American cowbird: appropriate responses to abnormal song. Science. 195: 1002-1004.
27. King AP, West MJ, White DJ. 2003. Female cowbird song perception: evidence for plasticity of preference. Ethology. 109:1-13.
28. King AP, White DJ, West MJ. 2003. Female proximity stimulates development of male competition in juvenile brown-headed cow-birds, Molothrus ater. Anim Behav. 66:817-828.
29. Kroodsma DE. 1976. Reproductive development in a female songbird-differential stimulation by quality of male song. Science. 192: 574-575.
30. Kroodsma DE, Byers BE. 1991. The function(s) of bird song. Am Zool. 31:318-328.
31. Kroodsma DE, Miller EH. 1996. Ecology and evolution of acoustic communication in birds. Ithaca (NY): Cornell University Press.
32. Leboucher G, Depraz V, Kreutzer M, Nagle L. 1998. Male song stimulation of female reproduction in canaries: features relevant to sexual displays are not relevant to nest-building or egg-laying. Ethology. 104:613-624.
33. Lehrman DS. 1965. Interaction between internal and external environments in the regulation of the reproductive cycle of the ring dove. In: Beach FA, editor. Sex and behavior. New York: Wiley. p. 355-380.
34. MacDougall-Shackleton EA, Derryberry EP, Hahn TP. 2002. Nonlocal male mountain white-crowned sparrows have lower paternity and higher parasite loads than males singing local dialect. Behav Ecol. 13:682-689.
35. Marler P, Slabbekoorn H. 2004. Nature's music: the science of birdsong. San Diego (CA): Elsevier.
36. Mazuc J, Bonneaud C, Chastel O, Sorci G. 2003. Social environment affects female and egg testosterone levels in the house sparrow (Passer domesticus). Ecol Lett. 6:1084-1090.
37. Nordby JC, Campbell SE, Beecher MD. 1999. Ecological correlates of song learning in song sparrows. Behav Ecol. 10:287-297.
38. Nordby JC, Campbell SE, Burt JM, Beecher MD. 2000. Social influences during song development in the song sparrow: a laboratory experiment simulating field conditions. Anim Behav. 59:1187-1197.
39. Nowicki S, Searcy WA. 2005. Song and mate choice in birds: how the development of behavior helps us understand function. Auk. 122:1-14.
40. O'Loghlen AL, Beecher MD. 1997. Sexual preferences for mate song types in female song sparrows. Anim Behav. 53:835-841.
41. O'Loghlen AL, Rothstein SI. 1995. Culturally correct song dialects are correlated with male age and female song preferences in wild populations of brown-headed cowbirds. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 36: 251-259.
42. Ortega CP. 1998. Cowbirds and their hosts. Tucson (AZ): University of Arizona Press.
43. Otter KA, Stewart IRK, McGregor PK, Terry AMR, Dabelsteen T, Burke T. 2001. Extra-pair paternity among Great Tits Parus major following manipulation of male signals. J Avian Biol. 32:338-344.
44. Pasteau M, Nagle L, Kreutzer M. 2009. Preferences and predispositions of female canaries (Serinus canaria) for loud intensity of male sexy phrases. Biol J Linn Soc. 96:808-814.
45. Payne RB, Payne LL. 1993. Song copying and cultural transmission in indigo buntings. Anim Behav. 46:1045-1065.
46. Rehsteiner U, Geisser H, Reyer HU. 1998. Singing and mating success in water pipits: one specific song element makes all the difference. Anim Behav. 55:1471-1481.
47. Rothstein SI, Yokel DA, Fleischer RC. 1988. The agonistic and sexual functions of vocalizations of male brown-headed cowbirds, Moloth-rus ater. Anim Behav. 36:73-86.
48. Sambrook J, Russel DW. 2001. Molecular cloning. 3rd ed. New York: Cold Springs Harbor Laboratory Press.
49. Searcy WA. 1981. A test for responsiveness to song structure and programming in female sparrows. Science. 213:926-928.
50. Searcy WA. 1984. Song repertoire size and female preferences in song sparrows. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 14:281-286.
51. Searcy WA. 1992. Measuring responses of female birds to male song. In: McGregor PK, editor. Playback and studies of animal communication. New York: Plenum Press. p. 175-189.
52. Searcy WA, Andersson M. 1986. Sexual selection and the evolution of song. Annu Rev Ecol Syst. 17:507-533.
53. Searcy WA, Nowicki S. 2005. The evolution of animal communication: reliability and deception in signaling systems. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.
54. Shamble PS, Wilgers DJ, Swoboda KA, Hebets EA. 2009. Courtship effort is a better predictor of mating success than ornamentation for male wolf spiders. Behav Ecol. 20:1242-1251.
55. Silk JB, Alberts SC, Altmann J. 2003. Social bonds of female baboons enhance infant survival. Science. 302:1231-1234.
56. Silk JB,BeehnerJC, BergmanTJ, CrockfordC,EnghAL, Moscovice LR, Wittig RM, Seyfarth RM, Cheney DL. 2009. The benefits of social capital: close social bonds among female baboons enhance offspring survival. Proc R Soc Lond B. 276:3099-3104.
57. Smith JNM, Cook TL, Rothstein SI, Robinson SF, Sealy SG. 2000. Ecology and management of cowbirds and their hosts. Austin (TX): University of Texas Press.
58. Smith WJ. 1977. The behavior of communicating. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University press.
59. Vinnedge B, Verrell P. 1998. Variance in male mating success and female choice for persuasive courtship displays. Anim Behav. 56: 443-448.
60. West MJ, King AP. 1988. Female visual displays affect the development of male song in the cowbird. Nature. 334:244-246.
61. West MJ, King AP, Eastzer DH. 1981. Validating the female bioassay of cowbird song: relating differences in song potency to mating success. Anim Behav. 29:490-501.
62. West MJ, White DJ, King AP. 2002. Female brown-headed cowbirds' (Molothrus ater) organization and behaviour reflects male social dynamics. Anim Behav. 64:377-385.
63. White DJ, Gersick AS, Freed-Brown G, Snyder-Mackler N. Forthcoming. The ontogeny of social skills: experimental increases in social complexity enhance reproductive success in adult cowbirds. Anim Behav.
64. White DJ, King AP, Duncan SD. 2002. Voice recognition technology as a tool for behaviour research. Behav Res Meth Instr Comp. 34:1-5.
65. White DJ, King AP, Gros-Louis J, West MJ. 2007. Constructing culture in cowbirds (Molothrus ater). J Comp Psychol. 121:113-122.
66. White DJ, King AP, West MJ. 2002a. Facultative development of courtship and communication in juvenile male cowbirds (Molothrus ater). Behav Ecol. 13:487-496.
67. White DJ, King AP, West MJ. Plasticity in adult development: experience with young males enhances mating competence in adult male cowbirds, Molothrus ater. Behaviour. 139:713-728.
68. Yokel DA, Rothstein SI. 1991. The basis for female choice in an avian brood parasite. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 29:39-45.