To innovate or not: Contrasting effects of social groupings on safe and risky foraging in Indian mynahs

Animal Behaviour

Volumn 86, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 1291-1300

  Griffin, Andrea S ^a   Lermite, Françoise ^a   Perea, Marjorie ^a   Guez, David ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEWCASTLE   (Australia)

Author keywords

Common myna; Innovation; Neophobia; Risky foraging; Sociality; Sturnus tristis

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; BIRD; CONSPECIFIC; FORAGING BEHAVIOR; PHENOTYPIC PLASTICITY; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR;

ACRIDOTHERES TRISTIS; AVES; STURNUS;

EID: 84888202678     PISSN: 00033472     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2013.09.035     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Barta Z., Giraldeau L. Daily patterns of optimal producer and scrounger use under predation hazard: a state-dependent dynamic game analysis. The American Naturalist 2000, 155:570-582.
2. Beauchamp G.U.Y. The effect of group size on mean food intake rate in birds. Biological Reviews 1998, 73:449-472.
3. Beauchamp G., Livoreil B. The effect of group size on vigilance and feeding rate in spice finches (Lonchura punctulata). Canadian Journal of Zoology 1997, 75:1526-1531.
4. Beauchamp G., Ruxton G.D. Changes in vigilance with group size under scramble competition. The American Naturalist 2003, 161:672-675.
5. Bednekoff P.A., Lima S.L. Risk allocation and competition in foraging groups: reversed effects of competition if group size varies under risk of predation. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 2004, 271:1491-1496.
6. Blumstein D.T., Daniel J.C., Evans C.S. JWatcher 1.0. An Introductory User's Guide 2006, http://www.jwatcher.ucla.edu.
7. Bugnyar T., Kotrschal K. Scrounging tactics in free-ranging ravens, Corvus corax. Ethology 2002, 108:993-1009.
8. Cole E.F., Cram D.L., Quinn J.L. Individual variation in spontaneous problem-solving performance among wild great tits. Animal Behaviour 2011, 81:491-498.
9. Coleman S.L., Mellgren R.L. Neophobia when feeding alone or in flocks in zebra finches, Taeniopygia guttata. Animal Behaviour 1994, 48:903-907.
10. Coolen I., Giraldeau L.-A. Incompatibility between antipredatory vigilance and scrounger tactic in nutmeg mannikins, Lonchura punctulata. Animal Behaviour 2003, 66:657-664.
11. Crawley M.J. Statistical Computing: an Introduction to Data Analysis using S-Plus 2002, J. Wiley, New York.
12. Diquelou M. Problem solving and its correlates: a comparative study in the Australian avifauna 2010, M.Sc. thesis, University of Paris 13.
13. Elgar M.A. Predator vigilance and group size in mammals and birds: a critical review of the empirical evidence. Biological Reviews 1989, 64:13-33.
14. Garamszegi L.Z., Erritzøe J., Møller A.P. Feeding innovations and parasitism in birds. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 2007, 90:441-455.
15. Greenberg R. The role of neophobia and neophilia in the development of innovative behaviour of birds. Animal Innovation 2003, 175-196. Oxford University Press, Oxford. S.M. Reader, K.N. Laland (Eds.).
16. Griffin A.S. Social learning in Indian mynahs, Acridotheres tristis: the role of distress calls. Animal Behaviour 2008, 75:79-89.
17. Griffin A.S., Boyce H.M. Indian mynahs, Acridotheres tristis, learn about dangerous places by observing the fate of others. Animal Behaviour 2009, 78:79-84.
18. Healy S.D., Rowe C. A critique of comparative studies of brain size. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 2007, 274:453-464.
19. Hong L., Page S.E. Groups of diverse problem solvers can outperform groups of high-ability problem solvers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A. 2004, 101:16385-16389.
20. Laland K.N., Reader S.M. Foraging innovation in the guppy. Animal Behaviour 1999, 57:331-340.
21. Lefebvre L. Taxonomic counts of cognition in the wild. Biology Letters 2011, 7:631-633.
22. Lefebvre L., Sol D. Brains, lifestyles and cognition: are there general trends?. Brain, Behavior and Evolution 2008, 72:135-144.
23. Lefebvre L., Whittle P., Lascaris E. Feeding innovations and forebrain size in birds. Animal Behaviour 1997, 53:549-560.
24. Lefebvre L., Gaxiola A., Dawson S., Timmermans S., Lajos R., Kabai P. Feeding innovations and forebrain size in Australasian birds. Behaviour 1998, 135:1077-1097.
25. Lefebvre L., Juretic N., Nicolakakis N., Timmermans S. Is the link between forebrain size and feeding innovations caused by confounding variables? A study of Australian and North American birds. Animal Cognition 2001, 4:91-97.
26. Lehner P.N. Handbook of Ethological Methods 1998, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
27. Lermite F. Innovation in Indian mynahs (Acridotheres tristis): a behavioural syndrome dependent upon social context? 2012, M.Sc. thesis, University of Paris 13.
28. Liker A., Bókony V. Larger groups are more successful in innovative problem solving in house sparrows. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A. 2009, 106:7893-7898.
29. Lima S.L., Bednekoff P.A. Back to the basics of antipredatory vigilance: can nonvigilant animals detect attack?. Animal Behaviour 1999, 58:537-543.
30. Mathot K.J., Giraldeau L.-A. Increasing vulnerability to predation increases preference for the scrounger foraging tactic. Behavioral Ecology 2007, 19:131-138.
31. Møller A.P. Successful city dwellers: a comparative study of the ecological characteristics of urban birds in the Western Palearctic. Oecologia 2009, 159:849-858.
32. Morand-Ferron J., Quinn J.L. Larger groups of passerines are more efficient problem solvers in the wild. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A. 2011, 108:15898-15903.
33. Morand-Ferron J., Cole E.F., Rawles J.E.C., Quinn J.L. Who are the innovators? A field experiment with 2 passerine species. Behavioral Ecology 2011, 22:1241-1248.
34. Nicolakakis N., Sol D., Lefebvre L. Behavioural flexibility predicts species richness in birds, but not extinction risk. Animal Behaviour 2003, 65:445-452.
35. Overington S.E., Morand-Ferron J., Boogert N.J., Lefebvre L. Technical innovations drive the relationship between innovativeness and residual brain size in birds. Animal Behaviour 2009, 78:1001-1010.
36. Overington S.E., Cauchard L., Morand-Ferron J., Lefebvre L. Innovation in groups: does the proximity of others facilitate or inhibit performance?. Behaviour 2009, 146:1543-1564.
37. Overington S.E., Griffin A.S., Sol D., Lefebvre L. Are innovative species ecological generalists? A test in North American birds. Behavioral Ecology 2011, 22:1286-1293.
38. Pfeffer K., Fritz J., Kotrschal K. Hormonal correlates of being an innovative greylag goose, Anser anser. Animal Behaviour 2002, 63:687-695.
39. Ranta E., Peuhkuri N., Hirvonen H., Barnard C. Producers, scroungers and the price of a free meal. Animal Behaviour 1998, 55:737-744.
40. Shultz S., Bradbury R.B., Evans K.L., Gregory R.D., Blackburn T.M. Brain size and resource specialization predict long-term population trends in British birds. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 2005, 272:2305-2311.
41. Sol D., Timmermans S., Lefebvre L. Behavioural flexibility and invasion success in birds. Animal Behaviour 2002, 495-502.
42. Sol D., Duncan R.P., Blackburn T.M., Cassey P., Lefebvre L. Big brains, enhanced cognition, and response of birds to novel environments. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A. 2005, 102:5460-5465.
43. Sol D., Stirling D.G., Lefebvre L. Behavioral drive or behavioral inhibition in evolution: subspecific diversification in Holarctic passerines. Evolution: International Journal of Organic Evolution 2005, 59:2669-2677.
44. Sol D., Bacher S., Reader S.M., Lefebvre L. Brain size predicts the success of mammal species introduced into novel environments. The American Naturalist 2008, 172 Supplement:S63-S71.
45. Sol D., Griffin A.S., Bartomeus I., Boyce H. Exploring or avoiding novel food resources? The novelty conflict in an invasive bird. PLoS One 2011, 6:e19535.
46. Sol D., Griffin A.S., Barthomeus I. Consumer and motor innovation in the common myna: the role of motivation and emotional responses. Animal Behaviour 2012, 83:179-188.
47. Soler J.J., Peralta-Sánchez J.M., Martín-Vivaldi M., Martín-Platero A.M., Flensted-Jensen E., Møller A.P. Cognitive skills and bacterial load: comparative evidence of costs of cognitive proficiency in birds. Naturwissenschaften 2012, 99:111-122.
48. Stöwe M., Kotrschal K. Behavioural phenotypes may determine whether social context facilitates or delays novel object exploration in ravens (Corvus corax). Journal of Ornithology 2007, 148:179-184.
49. Stöwe M., Bugnyar T., Loretto M.-C., Schloegl C., Range F., Kotrschal K. Novel object exploration in ravens (Corvus corax): effects of social relationships. Behavioural Processes 2006, 73:68-75.
50. Stöwe M., Bugnyar T., Heinrich B., Kotrschal K. Effects of group size on approach to novel objects in ravens (Corvus corax). Ethology 2006, 112:1079-1088.
51. Thornton A., Samson J. Innovative problem solving in wild meerkats. Animal Behaviour 2012, 83:1459-1468.
52. Tidemann C.R. Common Indian myna web site 2006, Read 29 August 2013. http://fennerschool-associated.anu.edu.au/myna/.
53. Tuchscherer M., Puppe B., Tuchscherer A., Kanitz E. Effects of social status after mixing on immune, metabolic, and endocrine responses in pigs. Physiology & Behavior 1998, 64:353-360.
54. Van Oers K. Context dependence of personalities: risk-taking behavior in a social and a nonsocial situation. Behavioral Ecology 2005, 16:716-723.
55. Vas Z., Lefebvre L., Johnson K.P., Reiczigel J., Rózsa L. Clever birds are lousy: co-variation between avian innovation and the taxonomic richness of their amblyceran lice. International Journal for Parasitology 2011, 41:1295-1300.
56. Visalberghi E., Addessi E. Seeing group members eating a familiar food enhances the acceptance of novel foods in capuchin monkeys. Animal Behaviour 2000, 60:69-76.
57. Visalberghi E., Valente M., Fragaszy D. Social context and consumption of unfamiliar foods by capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) over repeated encounters. American Journal of Primatology 1998, 45:367-380.
58. Wyles J.S., Kunkel J.G., Wilson A.C. Birds, behavior, and anatomical evolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A. 1983, 80:4394-4397.