Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 8, Issue 3, pp 213–217 | Cite as

Energy budgets, risk and foraging preferences in dark-eyed juncos (Junco hyemalis)

  • Thomas Caraco
Article

Summary

Juncos' preferences for constant versus variable food rewards were tested in three series of aviary experiments. Deprivation and feeding rates were varied across the three treatments, but the mean of the variable reward equalled the constant reward in every experiment. When the birds gained energy faster than required to meet all 24-h costs, they preferred the constant reward. When the birds' energy intake was less than the minimally required rate, they preferred the variable reward. When energy intake just balanced average daily costs, the birds preferred the constant reward or were indifferent, and their response depended on the particular mean-variance combination presented.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Beddington J, May RM (1977) Harvesting natural populations in a randomly fluctuating environment. Science 197:463–465Google Scholar
  2. Caraco T (1980) On foraging time allocation in a stochastic environment. Ecology 61:119–128Google Scholar
  3. Caraco T, Martindale S, Whittam TS (1980) An empirical demonstration of risk-sensitive foraging preferences. Anim Behav 28:820–830Google Scholar
  4. Coombs CH (1969) Portfolio theory: a theory of risky decision making. In: La decision. Centre National de la Recherche, Scientifique, ParisGoogle Scholar
  5. Coombs CH, Huang LC (1976) Tests of betweeness property of expected utility. J Math Psychol 13:323–337Google Scholar
  6. Friedman M, Savage LJ (1962) The utility analysis of choices involving risk. In: Hamilton EJ, Rees A, Johnson AG (eds) Landmarks in political economy. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 297–336Google Scholar
  7. Gill FB, Wolf LL (1975) Economics of feeding territoriality in the Golden-winged Sunbird. Ecology 56:333–345Google Scholar
  8. Gillespie JH (1977) Natural selection for variances in offspring numbers: a new evolutionary principle. Am Nat 111:1010–1014Google Scholar
  9. Gleit A (1978) Optimal harvesting in continuous time with stochastic growth. Math Biosci 41:111–123Google Scholar
  10. Green RF (in press) Bayesian birds: a simple example of Oaten's stochastic model of optimal foraging. Theor Popul BiolGoogle Scholar
  11. Herrnstein RJ (1964) Aperiodicity as a factor in choice. J Exp Anal Behav 7:179–182Google Scholar
  12. Istock CA (1978) Fitness variation in a natural population. In: Dingle H (ed) Evolution of migration and diapause. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 171–190Google Scholar
  13. Krebs JR, Kacelnik A, Taylor P (1978) Test of optimal sampling by foraging great tits. Nature 275:27–31Google Scholar
  14. Lea SEG (1979) Foraging and reinforcement schedules in the pigeon: optimal and non-optimal aspects of choice. Anim Behav 27:875–886Google Scholar
  15. MacArthur RA, Pianka ER (1966) On optimal use of a patchy environment. Am Nat 100:603–609Google Scholar
  16. Oaten A (1979) Optimal foraging in patches: a case for stochasticity. Theor Popul Biol 12:263–285Google Scholar
  17. Oster GF, Wilson EO (1978) Caste and ecology in the social insects. Mon Popul Biol 12:1–352Google Scholar
  18. Pimm SL (1978) An experimental approach to the effects of predictability on community structure. Am Zool 18:797–808Google Scholar
  19. Poole RW (1974) An introduction to quantitative ecology. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Pubols BH (1962) Constant vs. variable delay of reinforcement. J Comp Physiol Psychol 55:52–56Google Scholar
  21. Pulliam HR (1974) On the theory of optimal diets. Am Nat 108:59–74Google Scholar
  22. Pulliam HR, Millikan GC (in press) Social organization in the non-reprodutive season. In: Farner DS, King JR (eds) Avian biology, vol VI. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Pyke GH, Pulliam HR, Charnov EL (1977) Optimal foraging: a selective review of theory and tests. Q Rev Biol 52:137–154Google Scholar
  24. Real LA (1980a) Fitness, uncertainty, and the role of diversification in evolution and behavior. Am Nat 115:623–638Google Scholar
  25. Real LA (1980b) On uncertainty and the law of diminishing returns in evolution and behavior. In: Staddon JER (ed) Limits to action: The allocation of individual behavior. Academic Press, New York, pp 37–64Google Scholar
  26. Real LA Iin press) Uncertainty and pollinator-plant interactions: the foraging behavior of bees and wasps on artificial flowers. EcologyGoogle Scholar
  27. Schaffer WM (1974) Optimal reproductive effort in fluctuating environments. Am Nat 108:783–790Google Scholar
  28. Shettleworth SJ (1978) Reinforcement and the organization of behavior in golden hamsters: punishment of three action patterns. Learn Motiv 9:99–123Google Scholar
  29. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1969) Biometry. Freeman, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  30. Southwood TRE (1977) Habitat, the templat for ecological strategies? J Anim Ecol 46:337–365Google Scholar
  31. Stephens DW (in press) The logic of risk-sensitive foraging preferences. Anim BehavGoogle Scholar
  32. Taylor RJ (1976) Value of clumping to prey and the evolutionary response of ambush predators. Am Nat 110:13–29Google Scholar
  33. Templeton AR, Rothman ED (1974) Evolution in heterogeneous environments. Am Nat 108:409–428Google Scholar
  34. Thompson WA, Vertinsky I, Krebs JR (1974) The survival value of flocking in birds: a simulation model. J Anim Ecol 43:785–820Google Scholar
  35. Tversky A (1967) Utility theory and additivity analysis of risky choices. J Exp Psychol 75:27–36Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Caraco
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of BiologyUniversity of RochesterRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations