Advertisement

Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 27, Issue 3, pp 199–209 | Cite as

Provisioning of nestlings by dunnocks, Prunella modularis, in pairs and trios compensation reactions by males and females

  • B. J. Hatchwell
  • N. B. Davies
Article

Summary

The mating systems in a population of dunnocks included monogamy, polygyny, polyandry and polygynandry. Broods were provisioned by lone females, by females with the part-time help of one male, by females with the full-time help of one male (pairs) or by females with the part-time or full-time help of two males (trios). We compared provisioning of nestlings in these different systems and used the results of natural and experimental removals to examine how individuals reacted to the provisioning by others. In pairs, males and females provisioned at similar rates (Fig. 2a). In trios, females and alpha males fed chicks at the same rate, and at a higher rate than beta males (Fig. 2b). Females attained maximum male help when two males shared provisioning equally (Fig. 6). Females were more likely to achieve this when they were able to escape alpha male guarding during the mating period and exercise some control over mating access by the two males (Fig. 7). Female provisioning did not increase when their help was reduced from two males to one (Fig. 4 a), but it did increase when male help was further reduced to either one male's part-time help (Fig. 5 a) or no male help (Fig. 3 a). Beta males increased their provisioning rate when alpha males were removed from a trio (Fig. 4b). Alpha males may have increased their rate when beta males were removed but any reaction was small. When one male was removed from a trio, the remaining male's provisioning rate was as expected for a male in a monogamous pair. When reactions occurred, they were not sufficient to compensate for the loss of the removed adult and nestling weight was reduced. We discuss the relevance of these results to the maintenance of parental care by pairs and trios.

Keywords

Mating System Similar Rate Parental Care Mating Period Experimental Removal 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alatalo R, Lundberg A, Stahlbrandt K (1982) Why do pied flycatcher females mate with already mated males? Anim Behav 30:585–593Google Scholar
  2. Alatalo RV, Gottlander K, Lundberg A (1988) Conflict or cooperation between parents feeding nestlings in the pied flycatcher Ficedula hypoleuca (Pallas). Ornis Scand 9:31–34Google Scholar
  3. Brown JL, Dow DD, Brown ER, Brown SD (1978) Effects of helpers on feeding of nestlings in the grey-crowned babbler, Pomatostomus temporalis. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 4:43–59Google Scholar
  4. Brown JL, Brown ER, Brown SD, Dow DD (1982) Helpers: effects of experimental removal on reproductive success. Science 215:421–422Google Scholar
  5. Bryant DM (1988) Energy expenditure and body mass changes as measures of reproductive costs in birds. Funct Ecol 2:23–34Google Scholar
  6. Burke T, Davies NB, Bruford MW, Hatchwell BJ (1989) Parental care and mating behaviour of polyandrous dunnocks Prunella modularis related to paternity by DNA fingerprinting. Nature 338:249–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Byte PAF (1987) Behaviour and ecology of the dunnock, Prunella modularis. Unpubl PhD thesis, University of Cambridge, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  8. Chase ID (1980) Cooperative and noncooperative behaviour in animals. Am Nat 115:827–857Google Scholar
  9. Davies NB (1985) Cooperation and conflict among dunnocks, Prunella modularis, in a variable mating system. Anim Behav 33:628–648Google Scholar
  10. Davies NB (1986) Reproductive success of dunnocks, Prunella modularis, in a variable mating system. I. Factors influencing provisioning rate, nestling weight and fledging success. J Anim Ecol 55:123–138Google Scholar
  11. Davies NB (1990) Dunnocks: cooperation and conflict among males and females in a variable mating system. In: Stacey PB, Koenig WD (eds) Cooperative breeding in birds. CUP, Cambridge, pp 456–485Google Scholar
  12. Davies NB, Houston AI (1986) Reproductive success of dunnocks, Prunella modularis, in a variable mating system. II. Conflicts of interest among breeding adults. J Anim Ecol 55:139–154Google Scholar
  13. Davies NB, Lundberg A (1984) Food distribution and a variable mating system in the dunnock Prunella modularis. J Anim Ecol 53:895–912Google Scholar
  14. Emlen ST (1982) The evolution of helping. II. The role of behavioural conflict. Am Nat 119:40–53Google Scholar
  15. Emlen ST (1984) Cooperative breeding in birds and mammals. In: Krebs JR, Davies NB (eds) Behavioural ecology; an evolutionary approach (2nd edn). Blackwell, Oxford, pp 305–339Google Scholar
  16. Freed LA (1981) Loss of mass in breeding wrens: stress or adaptation? Ecology 62:1179–1186Google Scholar
  17. Houston AI, Davies NB (1985) The evolution of cooperation and life history in the dunnock, Prunella modularis. In: Sibly R, Smith R (eds) Behavioural ecology: the ecological consequences of adaptive behaviour. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 471–487Google Scholar
  18. Leffelaar D, Robertson RJ (1986) Equality of feeding roles and the maintenance of monogany in tree swallows. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 18:199–206Google Scholar
  19. Lyon BE, Montgomerie RD, Hamilton RD (1987) Male parental care and monogamy in snow buntings. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 20:377–382Google Scholar
  20. Møller AP (1988) Paternity and paternal care in the swallow, Hirundo rustica. Anim Behav 36:996–1005Google Scholar
  21. Morton ES (1987) Variation in mate guarding intensity by male purple martins. Behaviour 101:211–224Google Scholar
  22. Norberg RA (1981) Temporary weight decrease in breeding birds may result in more fledged young. Am Nat 118:838–850Google Scholar
  23. Orians GH, Pearson NE (1979) On the theory of central place foraging. In: Horn DJ, Mitchell R, Stair GR (eds) Analysis of ecological systems. Ohio State University Press, Columbus, pp 155–177Google Scholar
  24. Perrins CM (1965) Population fluctuations and clutch size in the great tit, Parus major L. J Anim Ecol 34:601–647Google Scholar
  25. Smith HG, Kallander H, Fontell K, Ljungstrom M (1988) Feeding frequency and parental division of labour in the double-brooded great tit Parus major. Effects of manipulating brood size. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 22:447–453Google Scholar
  26. Studd MV, Robertson RJ (1985) Sexual selection and variation in reproductive strategies in male yellow warblers (Dendroica petechia). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 17:101–109Google Scholar
  27. Trivers RL (1972) Parental investment and sexual selection. In: Campbell B (ed) Sexual selection and the descent of man, 1871–1971. Aldine Press Chicago, pp 136–179Google Scholar
  28. Westneat DF (1988) Male parental care and extrapair copulations in the indigo bunting. Auk 105:149–160Google Scholar
  29. Westneat DF, Sherman PW, Morton ML (1990) The ecology and evolution of extra-pair copulations in birds. Curr Ornith 7Google Scholar
  30. Williams GC (1966) Natural selection, the costs of reproduction, and a refinement of Lack's principle. Am Nat 100:687–690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Winkler DW (1987) A general model for parental care. Am Nat 130:526–543Google Scholar
  32. Wright J, Cuthill I (1989) Manipulation of sex differences in parental care. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 25:171–181Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. J. Hatchwell
    • 1
  • N. B. Davies
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations