Behavior of indian peafowl Pavo cristatus Linn. 1758 during the mating period in a natural population

Open Ornithology Journal

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 13-19

  Harikrishnan, S ^a   Vasudevan, Karthikeyan ^a   Sivakumar, K ^a  

^a WILDLIFE INSTITUTE OF INDIA   (India)

Author keywords

Breeding behaviour; Exploded leks; In situ behaviour; Peafowl; Time activity budgets

Indexed keywords

PAVO; PAVO CRISTATUS;

EID: 78449239606     PISSN: None     EISSN: 18744532     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2174/1874453201003010013     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Gadagkar R. Is the peacock merely beautiful or also honest? Curr Sci (Bangalore) 2003; 85: 1012-20.
2. Manning JT. Age-advertisement and the evolution of the peacock's train. J Evol Biol 1989; 2: 379-84.
3. Petrie M, Halliday T, Sanders C. Peahens prefer peacocks with elaborate trains. Anim Behav 1991; 41: 323-31.
4. Petrie M. Peacocks with low mating success are more likely to suffer predation. Anim Behav 1992; 44: 585-6.
5. Petrie M. Improved growth and survival of offspring of peacocks with more elaborate trains. Nature 1994; 371: 598-9.
6. Petrie M, Halliday T. Experimental and natural changes in the peacock's train can affect mating success. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 1994; 35: 213-7.
7. Petrie M, Cotgreave P, Stewart I. Variation in the train morphology of the peacocks. J Zool 1996; 238: 365-71.
8. Walther BA, Clayton DA. Elaborate ornaments are costly to maintain: evidence for high maintenance handicaps. Behav Ecol 2005; 16: 89-95.
9. Irschick DJ, Herrel A, Vanhooydonk B, Damme RV. A functional approach to sexual selection. Funct Ecol 2007; 21: 621-6.
10. Ali S, Ripley DS. Handbook of the birds of India and Pakistan. Oxford University Press: UK 1969.
11. Lank DB, Smith CM, Hanotte O, Ohtonen A, Bailey S, Burke T. High frequency polyandry in a lek mating system. Behav Ecol 2002; 13: 209-15.
12. Hillgarth N. Social organization of wild peafowl in India. J World Pheasant Assoc 1984; 9: 47-56.
13. Rands MRW, Ridley MW, Leliott AD. The social organization of feral peafowl. Anim Behav 1984; 32: 830-5.
14. Loyau A, Jalme MS, Sorci G. Non-defendable resources affect peafowl lek organization: a male removal experiment. Behav Proc 2007; 74: 64-70.
15. Galusha Jr, JG, Hill Jr, LM. A study of the behavior of Indian peacocks (Pavo cristatus) on protection island, Jefferson County. Washington, USA: Pavo 1996; vol. 34: pp. 23-31.
16. Sharma IK. Social and sexual behavior of peafowl. Environ Aware 1978; 1: 169-71.
17. Yasmin S, Yahya HAS. Correlates of mating success in Indian peafowl. Auk 1996; 113: 490-2.
18. Sathyanarayana MC, Rathinasabapathy B. Notes on the feeding ecology and activity patterns of the blue peafowl. J World Pheasant Assoc 1990-92; 15 & 16: 97-101.
19. Champion HG, Seth SK. A revised survey of the forest types of India. New Delhi: Government of India Press 1968.
20. Osmaston BB, Sale JB. Wildlife of Dehra Dun and adjacent hills. Dehra Dun: Natraj Publishers 1989.
21. Johnsgard PA. The Pheasants of the world. Oxford: Oxford University Press 1986.
22. Armstrong AA. Bird display and behavior: an introduction to the study of bird psychology. England: Lindsay Drummond Ltd 1947.
23. Johnsingh AJT, Murali S. The ecology and behavior of indian peafowl Pavo cristatus Linn. of Injar. J Bombay Nat Hist Soc 1980; 75: 1069-79.
24. Harihar A, Pandav B, Goyal SP. Responses of tiger (Panthera tigris) and their prey to removal of anthropogenic influences in raja ji national park, India. Eur J Wildl Res 2009; 55: 97-105.
25. Altmann J. Observational study of behavior: sampling methods. Behavior 1973; XLIX: 227-67.
26. Jassby AD, Powell TM. Detecting changes in ecological time series. Ecology 1990; 71: 2044-52.
27. Gibbons JD. Nonparametric statistical inference. New York: McGraw-Hill Inc. 1971.
28. Walther BA. Do peacocks devote maintenance time to their ornamental plumage? time budgets of male blue peafowl. Pavo cristatus Lundiana 2003; 4: 149-54.
29. Galusha JG, Redd JM. Population structure and daytime behavior of indian peafowl (Pavo cristatus) on protection island, Jefferson County, Washington. Pavo 1992; 30: 75-86.
30. Ridley MW, Lelliott AD, Rands MRW. The courtship display of feral peafowl. J World Pheasant Assoc 1983-84; 9: 57-68.
31. Foster MS. Disruption, dispersion, and dominance in lek-breeding birds. Am Nat 1983; 122: 53-72.
32. Johnsguard PA. Arena birds: sexual selection and behavior. Washington DC: Smithsonian Institution Press 1994.