The use and relative importance of intraspecific and interspecific social information in a bird community

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 55-64

  Jaakkonen, Tuomo ^a   Kivelä, Sami M ^a,c   Meier, Christoph M ^b   Forsman, Jukka T ^a,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OULU   (Finland)

^b SWISS ORNITHOLOGICAL INSTITUTE   (Switzerland)

^c STOCKHOLM UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TURKU   (Finland)

Author keywords

Cavity nesting birds; Interspecific; Intraspecific; Nest site choice; Social information

Indexed keywords

CONSPECIFIC; DECISION MAKING; INTERSPECIFIC VARIATION; INTRASPECIFIC VARIATION; NEST SITE; NICHE OVERLAP; PASSERINE; PREFERENCE BEHAVIOR; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR;

AVES; CYANISTES CAERULEUS; FICEDULA ALBICOLLIS; PARUS MAJOR;

EID: 84928402730     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/aru144     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Ahola MP, Laaksonen T, Eeva T, Lehikoinen E. 2007. Climate change can alter competitive relationships between resident and migratory birds. J Anim Ecol. 76:1045-1052.
2. Avargues-Weber A, Dawson EH, Chittka L. 2013. Mechanisms of social learning across species boundaries. J Zool. 290:1-11.
3. Barluenga M, Barbosa A, Moreno E. 2000. Social relationships due to sex, age and morphology in Great Tits Parus major wintering in a mountainous habitat of Central Spain. Ardeola. 47:19-27.
4. Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B. 2011. lme4: linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999375-42. Available from: http://www.r-project.org/(Accessed 01 August 2011).
5. Battesti M, Moreno C, Joly D, Mery F. 2012. Spread of social information and dynamics of social transmission within Drosophila groups. Curr Biol. 22:309-313.
6. Bogacz R, Brown E, Moehlis J, Holmes P, Cohen JD. 2006. The physics of optimal decision making: a formal analysis of models of performance in two-alternative forced-choice tasks. Psychol Rev. 113:700-765.
7. Bouton N, Seehausen O, Alphen JV. 1997. Resource partitioning among rock-dwelling haplochromines (Pisces: Cichlidae) from Lake Victoria. Ecol Freshw Fish 6:225-240.
8. Chittka L, Leadbeater E. 2005. Social learning: public information in insects. Curr Biol. 15:R869-R871.
9. Chittka L, Rossiter SJ, Skorupski P, Fernando C. 2012. What is comparable in comparative cognition? Phil Trans R Soc B. 367:2677-2685.
10. Coolen I, Van Bergen Y, Day RL, Laland KN. 2003. Species difference in adaptive use of public information in sticklebacks. Proc R Soc B. 270:2413-2419.
11. Danchin E, Giraldeau L, Valone TJ, Wagner RH. 2004. Public information: from nosy neighbors to cultural evolution. Science. 305:487-491.
12. Danchin E, Heg D, Doligez B. 2001. Public information and breeding habitat selection. In: Clobert J, Danchin E, Dhondt AA, Nichols JD, editors. Dispersal. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 243-258.
13. Dhondt AA. 1977. Interspecific competition between great and blue tit. Nature. 268:521-523.
14. Doligez B, Danchin E, Clobert J. 2002. Public information and breeding habitat selection in a wild bird population. Science. 297:1168-1170.
15. Doligez B, Part T, Danchin E, Clobert J, Gustafsson L. 2004. Availability and use of public information and conspecific density for settlement decisions in the collared flycatcher. J Anim Ecol. 73:75-87.
16. Fletcher RJ, Miller CW. 2008. The type and timing of social information alters offspring production. Biol Lett. 4:482-485.
17. Forsman JT, Hjernquist MB, Taipale J, Gustafsson L. 2008. Competitor density cues for habitat quality facilitating habitat selection and investment decisions. Behav Ecol. 19:539-545.
18. Forsman JT, Seppanen J, Monkkonen M. 2002. Positive fitness consequences of interspecific interaction with a potential competitor. Proc R Soc B. 269:1619-1623.
19. Forsman JT, Seppanen J. 2011. Learning what (not) to do: testing rejection and copying of simulated heterospecific behavioural traits. Anim Behav. 81:879-883.
20. Forsman JT, Thomson RL, Seppanen J. 2007. Mechanisms and fitness effects of interspecific information use between migrant and resident birds. Behav Ecol. 18:888-894.
21. Galef BG Jr, Giraldeau LA. 2001. Social influences on foraging in vertebrates: causal mechanisms and adaptive functions. Anim Behav. 61:3-15.
22. Goodale E, Beauchamp G, Magrath RD, Nieh JC, Ruxton GD. 2010. Interspecific information transfer influences animal community structure. Trends Ecol Evol. 25:354-361.
23. Gosler AG, Clement P. 2007. Family Paridae (tits and chickadees). In: del Hoyo J, Elliot A, Christie D, editors. Handbook of the birds of the world. Vol. 12. Barcelona, Spain: Lynx Edicions. p. 662-750.
24. Grant PR, Grant BR. 2006. Evolution of character displacement in Darwin's finches. Science. 313:224-226.
25. Gustafsson L. 1987. Interspecific competition lowers fitness in collared flycatchers Ficedula albicollis: an experimental demonstration. Ecology. 68:291-296.
26. Hadfield JD. 2010. MCMC methods for multi-response generalized linear mixed models: the MCMCglmm R package. J Stat Soft. 33:1-22.
27. Hodge MA, Storfer-Isser A. 1997. Conspecific and heterospecific attraction: a mechanism of web-site selection leading to aggregation formation by web-building spiders. Ethology. 103:815-826.
28. Jaakkonen T, Kari A, Forsman JT. 2013. Flycatchers copy conspecifics in nest-site selection but neither personal experience nor frequency of tutors have an effect. PLoS One. 8:e60395.
29. Kendal RL, Coolen I, Laland KN. 2004. The role of conformity in foraging when personal and social information conflict. Behav Ecol. 15:269-277.
30. Kivela SM, Seppanen J, Ovaskainen O, Doligez B, Gustafsson L, Monkkonen M, Forsman JT. 2014. The past and the present in decisionmaking: the use of con- and heterospecific cues in nest-site selection. Ecology.
31. Laland KN. 2004. Social learning strategies. Learn Behav. 32:4-14.
32. Leadbeater E, Chittka L. 2007. Social learning in insects.from miniature brains to consensus building. Curr Biol. 17:R703-R713.
33. Loukola OJ, Seppanen J, Forsman JT. 2012. Intraspecific social information use in the selection of nest site characteristics. Anim Behav. 83:629-633.
34. Loukola OJ, Seppänen JT, Krams I, Torvinen SS, Forsman JT. 2013. Observed fitness may affect niche overlap in competing species via selective social information use. Am Nat. 182:474-483.
35. Martin TE 1996. Fitness costs of resource overlap among coexisting bird species. Nature. 380:338-340.
36. McKaye KR, Marsh A. 1983. Food switching by two specialized algaescraping cichlid fishes in Lake Malawi, Africa. Oecologia. 56:245-248.
37. Miller CW, Fletcher RJ Jr, Gillespie SR. 2013. Conspecific and heterospecific cues override resource quality to influence offspring production. PLoS One. 8:e70268.
38. Mönkkönen M, Härdling R, Forsman J, Tuomi J. 1999. Evolution of heterospecific attraction: using other species as cues in habitat selection. Evol Ecol. 13:91-104.
39. Mönkkönen M, Helle P, Soppela K. 1990. Numerical and behavioural responses of migrant passerines to experimental manipulation of resident tits (Parus spp.): heterospecific attraction in northern breeding bird communities? Oecologia. 85:218-225.
40. Parejo D, Danchin É, Avilés JM. 2005. The heterospecific habitat copying hypothesis: can competitors indicate habitat quality? Behav Ecol. 16:96-105.
41. Parejo D, White J, Danchin E. 2007. Settlement decisions in blue tits: difference in the use of social information according to age and individual success. Naturwissenschaften. 94:749-757.
42. Plummer M, Best N, Cowles K, Vines K. 2006. CODA: convergence diagnosis and output analysis for MCMC. R News. 6:7-11.
43. Pruett-Jones S. 1992. Independent versus nonindependent mate choice: do females copy each other? Am Nat. 140:1000-1009.
44. R Development Core Team. 2011. R: a language and environment for statistical computing [Internet]. Vienna (Austria): R Foundation for Statistical Computing [cited 2011 August 1]. Available from: Http://www.R-project.org.
45. Rainey HJ, Zuberbühler K, Slater PJ. 2004. Hornbills can distinguish between primate alarm calls. Proc R Soc B. 271:755-759.
46. Raitanen J, Forsman JT, Kivelä SM, Mäenpää MI, Välimäki P. 2014. Attraction to conspecific eggs may guide oviposition site selection in a solitary insect. Behav Ecol. 25:110-116.
47. Randler C. 2006. Red squirrels (Sciurus vulgaris) respond to alarm calls of Eurasian jays (Garrulus glandarius). Ethology. 112:411-416.
48. Rieucau G, Giraldeau L. 2009. Persuasive companions can be wrong: the use of misleading social information in nutmeg mannikins. Behav Ecol. 20:1217-1222.
49. Robertson BA, Hutto RL. 2006. A framework for understanding ecological traps and an evaluation of existing evidence. Ecology. 87:1075-1085.
50. Sebastián-González E, Sánchez-Zapata JA, Botella F, Ovaskainen O. 2010. Testing the heterospecific attraction hypothesis with time-series data on species co-occurrence. Proc R Soc B. 277:2983-2990.
51. Seppänen JT, Forsman JT, Mönkkönen M, Krams I, Salmi T. 2011. New behavioural trait adopted or rejected by observing heterospecific tutor fitness. Proc R Soc B. 278:1736-1741.
52. Seppänen JT, Forsman JT, Mönkkönen M, Thomson RL. 2007. Social information use is a process across time, space, and ecology, reaching heterospecifics. Ecology. 88:1622-1633.
53. Seppänen JT, Forsman JT. 2007. Interspecific social learning: novel preference can be acquired from a competing species. Curr Biol. 17:1248-1252.
54. Siikamäki P. 1998. Limitation of reproductive success by food availability and breeding time in pied flycatchers. Ecology. 79:1789-1796.
55. Slagsvold T, Wigdahl Kleiven K, Eriksen A, Johannessen LE. 2013. Vertical and horizontal transmission of nest site preferences in titmice. Anim Behav. 85:323-328.
56. Smith JN, Grant P, Grant B, Abbott I, Abbott L. 1978. Seasonal variation in feeding habits of Darwin's ground finches. Ecology. 59:1137-1150.
57. Sol D, Duncan RP, Blackburn TM, Cassey P, Lefebvre L. 2005. Big brains, enhanced cognition, and response of birds to novel environments. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 102:5460-5465.
58. Stamps JA. 1988. Conspecific attraction and aggregation in territorial species. Am Nat. 131:329-347.
59. Stöhr S. 1998. Evolution of mate-choice copying: a dynamic model. Anim Behav. 55:893-903.
60. Svensson L. 1992. Identification guide to European passerines. 4th ed. Thetford (UK): British Trust for Ornithology.
61. Thomson RL, Sirkiä PM, Villers A, Laaksonen T. 2013. Temporal peaks in social information: prospectors investigate conspecific nests after a simulated predator visit. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 67:905-911.
62. Vakirtzis A. 2011. Mate choice copying and nonindependent mate choice: a critical review. Ann Zool Fennici. 48:91-107.
63. Valone TJ, Templeton JJ. 2002. Public information for the assessment of quality: a widespread social phenomenon. Phil Trans R Soc B. 357:1549-1557.
64. Van Bergen Y, Coolen I, Laland KN. 2004. Nine-spined sticklebacks exploit the most reliable source when public and private information conflict. Proc R Soc B. 271:957-962.
65. Whiten A, Horner V, De Waal FB. 2005. Conformity to cultural norms of tool use in chimpanzees. Nature. 437:737-740.
66. Wiggins DA, Pärt TT, Gustafsson L. 1994. Seasonal decline in collared flycatcher Ficedula albicollis reproductive success: an experimental approach. Oikos. 70:359-364.
67. Zuberbühler K. 2000. Interspecies semantic communication in two forest primates. Proc R Soc B. 267:713-718.