Competitor phenology as a social cue in breeding site selection

Journal of Animal Ecology

Volumn 86, Issue 3, 2017, Pages 615-623

  Samplonius, Jelmer M ^a   Both, Christiaan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

climate; competition; habitat selection; heterospecific attraction; mate choice; protandry; public information; social learning; species interactions; timing

Indexed keywords

ARRIVAL DATE; BREEDING SITE; CLIMATE CHANGE; ENVIRONMENTAL CUE; HABITAT QUALITY; HATCHING; INTERSPECIFIC COMPETITION; LEARNING; MATE CHOICE; NEST PREDATION; NUTRITION; PASSERINE; PHENOLOGY; PROTANDRY; SETTLING BEHAVIOR; SITE SELECTION;

ANIMALIA; FICEDULA HYPOLEUCA;

ANIMAL; ASSOCIATION; ECOSYSTEM; FEMALE; MALE; NETHERLANDS; PHYSIOLOGY; POPULATION MIGRATION; REPRODUCTION; SEX RATIO; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR; SONGBIRD; SPECIES DIFFERENCE; TIME FACTOR;

ANIMAL MIGRATION; ANIMALS; CUES; ECOSYSTEM; FEMALE; MALE; NETHERLANDS; REPRODUCTION; SEX RATIO; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; SONGBIRDS; SPECIES SPECIFICITY; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 85013958245     PISSN: 00218790     EISSN: 13652656     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1365-2656.12640     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Ahola, M.P., Laaksonen, T., Eeva, T. & Lehikoinen, E. (2007) Climate change can alter competitive relationships between resident and migratory birds. Journal of Animal Ecology, 76, 1045–1052.
2. Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B.M. & Walker, S.C. (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software. 67, 1–48.
3. Battesti, M., Moreno, C., Joly, D. & Mery, F. (2012) Spread of social information and dynamics of social transmission within Drosophila groups. Current Biology, 22, 309–313.
4. Both, C., Bijlsma, R.G. & Ouwehand, J. (2016) Repeatability in spring arrival dates in Pied Flycatchers varies among years and sexes. Ardea, 104, 3–21.
5. Both, C., van Asch, M., Bijlsma, R.G., van den Burg, A.B. & Visser, M.E. (2009) Climate change and unequal phenological changes across four trophic levels: constraints or adaptations? Journal of Animal Ecology, 78, 73–83.
6. Both, C., Burger, C., Ouwehand, J., Samplonius, J.M. & Bijlsma, R.G. (In press) Delayed age at first breeding and experimental removals show large non-breeding surplus in pied flycatchers. Ardea.
7. Burger, C., Belskii, E., Eeva, T. et al. (2012) Climate change, breeding date and nestling diet: how temperature differentially affects seasonal changes in pied flycatcher diet depending on habitat variation. Journal of Animal Ecology, 81, 926–936.
8. Citta, J.J. & Lindberg, M.S. (2007) Nest-site selection of passerines: effects of geographic scale and public and personal information. Ecology, 88, 2034–2046.
9. Colombelli-Négrel, D., Hauber, M.E., Robertson, J., Sulloway, F.J., Hoi, H., Griggio, M. & Kleindorfer, S. (2012) Embryonic learning of vocal passwords in superb fairy-wrens reveals intruder cuckoo nestlings. Current Biology, 22, 2155–2160.
10. Colombelli-Négrel, D., Webster, M.S., Dowling, J.L., Hauber, M.E. & Kleindorfer, S. (2016) Vocal imitation of mother's calls by begging Red-backed Fairywren nestlings increases parental provisioning. The Auk, 133, 273–285.
11. Coolen, I., Ward, A.J.W., Hart, P.J.B. & Laland, K.N. (2005) Foraging nine-spined sticklebacks prefer to rely on public information over simpler social cues. Behavioral Ecology, 16, 865–870.
12. Cortés-Avizanda, A., Jovani, R., Doná Zar, J. & Grimm, V. (2014) Bird sky networks: how do avian scavengers use social information to find carrion? Ecology, 95, 1799–1808.
13. Danchin, E., Giraldeau, L.-A., Valone, T.J. & Wagner, R.H. (2004) Public information: from nosy neighbors to cultural evolution. Science, 305, 487–491.
14. Deutsch, J.C. & Nefdt, R.J. (1992) Olfactory cues influence female choice in two lek-breeding antelopes. Nature, 356, 596–598.
15. Doligez, B., Danchin, E. & Clobert, J. (2002) Public information and breeding habitat selection in a wild bird population. Science, 297, 1168–1170.
16. Doligez, B., Pärt, T. & Danchin, E. (2004) Availability and use of public information and conspecific density for settlement decisions in the collared flycatcher. Journal of Animal Ecology, 41, 75–87.
17. Drent, R. & Daan, S. (1980) The prudent parent: energetic adjustments in avian breeding. Ardea, 68, 225–252.
18. Drost, R. (1936) Über das Brutkleid männlicher Trauenfliegenfänger, Muscicapa hypoleuca. Vogelzug, 6, 179–186.
19. Forsman, J.T. & Seppänen, J.-T. (2011) Learning what (not) to do: testing rejection and copying of simulated heterospecific behavioural traits. Animal Behaviour, 81, 879–883.
20. Forsman, J.T., Seppänen, J.-T. & Mönkkönen, M. (2002) Positive fitness consequences of interspecific interaction with a potential competitor. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 269, 1619–1623.
21. Forsman, J. & Thomson, R. (2008) Evidence of information collection from heterospecifics in cavity-nesting birds. Ibis, 150, 409–412.
22. Gustafsson, L. (1987) Interspecific competition lowers fitness in collared flycatchers Ficedula albicollis: an experimental demonstration. Ecology, 68, 291–296.
23. Hinks, A.E., Cole, E.F., Daniels, K.J., Wilkin, T.A., Nakagawa, S. & Sheldon, B.C. (2015) Scale-dependent phenological synchrony between songbirds and their caterpillar food source. The American Naturalist, 186, 84–97.
24. Jaakkonen, T., Kivela, S.M., Meier, C.M. & Forsman, J.T. (2015) The use and relative importance of intraspecific and interspecific social information in a bird community. Behavioral Ecology, 26, 55–64.
25. Kivelä, S.M., Seppänen, J.-T., Ovaskainen, O., Doligez, B., Gustafsson, L., Mönkkönen, M. & Forsman, J.T. (2014) The past and the present in decision-making: the use of con- and heterospecific cues in nest-site selection. Ecology, 95, 3428–3439.
26. Kokko, H. (1999) Competition for early arrival birds in migratory birds. Journal of Animal Ecology, 68, 940–950.
27. Kokko, H., Gunnarsson, T.G., Morrell, L.J. & Gill, J.A. (2006) Why do female migratory birds arrive later than males? Journal of Animal Ecology, 75, 1293–1303.
28. Lambrechts, M.M., Caro, S., Charmantier, A. et al. (2004) Habitat quality as a predictor of spatial variation in blue tit reproductive performance: a multi-plot analysis in a heterogeneous landscape. Oecologia, 141, 555–561.
29. Loukola, O.J., Seppänen, J.-T., Krams, I., Torvinen, S.S. & Forsman, J.T. (2013) Observed fitness may affect niche overlap in competing species via selective social information use. The American Naturalist, 182, 474–483.
30. Merilä, J. & Wiggins, D. (1995) Interspecific competition for nest holes causes adult mortality in the Collared Flycatcher. Condor, 97, 445–450.
31. Mönkkönen, M., Härdling, R., Forsman, J. & Tuomi, J. (1999) Evolution of heterospecific attraction: using other species as cues in habitat selection. Evolutionary Ecology, 13, 91–104.
32. Morbey, Y.E., Coppack, T. & Pulido, F. (2012) Adaptive hypotheses for protandry in arrival to breeding areas: a review of models and empirical tests. Journal of Ornithology, 153, 207–215.
33. Morbey, Y.E. & Ydenberg, R.C. (2001) Protandrous arrival timing to breeding areas: a review. Ecology Letters, 4, 663–673.
34. Orians, G.H. & Wittenberger, J.F. (1991) Spatial and temporal scales in habitat selection. The American Naturalist, 137, S29–S49.
35. Ouwehand, J. & Both, C. (2016) Alternate non-stop migration strategies of pied flycatchers to cross the Sahara desert. Biology Letters, 12, 20151060.
36. Ouwehand, J., Ahola, M.P., Ausems, A.N.M.A. et al. (2016) Light-level geolocators reveal migratory connectivity in European populations of pied flycatchers Ficedula hypoleuca. Journal of Avian Biology, 47, 69–83.
37. Parejo, D., Danchin, E. & Avilés, J.M. (2005) The heterospecific habitat copying hypothesis: can competitors indicate habitat quality? Behavioral Ecology, 16, 96–105.
38. Parejo, D., White, J., Clobert, J., Dreiss, A. & Danchin, E. (2007) Blue Tits use fledgling quantity and quality as public information in breeding site choice. Ecology, 88, 2373–2382.
39. R Development Core Team (2016) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
40. Riddington, R. & Gosler, A. (1995) Differences in reproductive success and parental qualities between habitats in the Great Tit Parus major. Ibis, 137, 371–378.
41. Robertson, B.A. & Hutto, R.L. (2006) A framework for understanding ecological traps and an evaluation of existing evidence. Ecology, 87, 1075–1085.
42. Saino, N., Rubolini, D., Serra, L., Caprioli, M., Morganti, M., Ambrosini, R. & Spina, F. (2010) Sex-related variation in migration phenology in relation to sexual dimorphism: a test of competing hypotheses for the evolution of protandry. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 23, 2054–2065.
43. Samplonius, J.M. & Both, C. (2017) Data from: Competitor phenology as a social cue in breeding site selection. Dryad Digital Repository, https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.bs427.
44. Samplonius, J.M., Kappers, E.F., Brands, S. & Both, C. (2016) Phenological mismatch and ontogenetic diet shifts interactively affect offspring condition in a passerine. Journal of Animal Ecology, 85, 1255–1264.
45. Seppänen, J.-T. & Forsman, J.T. (2007) Interspecific social learning: novel preference can be acquired from a competing species. Current Biology: CB, 17, 1248–1252.
46. Seppänen, J.-T., Forsman, J.T., Monkkönen, M. & Thomson, R.L. (2007) Social information use is a process across time, space, and ecology, reaching heterospecifics. Ecology, 88, 1622–1633.
47. Seppänen, J.-T., Forsman, J.T., Mönkkönen, M., Krams, I. & Salmi, T. (2011) New behavioural trait adopted or rejected by observing heterospecific tutor fitness. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 278, 1736–1741.
48. Slagsvold, T. (1975) Competition between the Great Tit Parus major and the Pied Flycatcher Ficedula hypoleuca in the breeding season. Ornis Scandinavica, 6, 179–190.
49. Stamps, J.A. (1988) Conspecific attraction and aggregation in territorial species. The American Naturalist, 131, 329–347.
50. Svensson, E. & Nilsson, J. (1995) Food supply, territory quality, and reproductive timing in the blue tit (Parus caeruleus). Ecology, 76, 1804–1812.
51. Teague O'Mara, M., Dechmann, D.K.N. & Page, R.A. (2014) Frugivorous bats evaluate the quality of social information when choosing novel foods. Behavioral Ecology, 25, 1233–1239.
52. Thackeray, S.J., Sparks, T.H., Frederiksen, M. et al. (2010) Trophic level asynchrony in rates of phenological change for marine, freshwater and terrestrial environments. Global Change Biology, 16, 3304–3313.
53. Thackeray, S.J., Henrys, P.A., Hemming, D. et al. (2016) Phenological sensitivity to climate across taxa and trophic levels. Nature, 535, 241–245.
54. Therneau, T. (2015) A Package for Survival Analysis in S. Mayo Foundation, Rochester, MN, USA.
55. Therneau, T., Crowson, C. & Atkinson, E. (2016) Using time dependent covariates and time dependent coefficients in the Cox model. Mayo Clinic. Available at: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/survival/vignettes/timedep.pdf (accessed 5 January 2017).
56. Van Balen, J.H. (1973) A comparative study of the breeding ecology of the great tit Parus major in different habitats. Ardea, 61, 1–93.
57. Verhulst, S. & Tinbergen, J. (1991) Experimental evidence for a causal relationship between timing and success of reproduction in the great tit Parus m. major. Journal of Animal Ecology, 60, 269–282.
58. Visser, M.E. & Both, C. (2005) Shifts in phenology due to global climate change: the need for a yardstick. Proceedings of the Royal Society Biological Sciences Series B, 272, 2561–2569.
59. Visser, M.E., van Noordwijk, A.J., Tinbergen, J.M. & Lessells, C.M. (1998) Warmer springs lead to mistimed reproduction in great tits (Parus major). Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 265, 1867–1870.
60. Wickham, H. (2009) ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, USA.