Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 64, Issue 8, pp 1351–1361 | Cite as

Experimental evidence of specialised phenotypic roles in a mobbing raptor

Original Paper

Abstract

Group living is associated with costs but also with potential benefits, such as a decrease in predation risk through, for example, higher defence efficiency. Mobbing is among the most specialised forms of anti-predator strategies involving group defence and has mainly been investigated in passerine birds and some mammals. Variation in the mobbing response has been found in several species according to phenotypic variation such as sex or age. This suggests that there are differential benefits between mobbers, which may have promoted individual specialisation in mobbing behaviour. We studied mobbing behaviour in a communal roosting raptor, the Marsh harrier (Circus aeruginosus), which shows active group defence. Our study population exhibits extreme colour polymorphism, with two colour morphs in males, as well as sexual dichromatism and colour variation with age. We used different decoys, placed at different distances from the roost, to manipulate experimentally the perceived predation risk and to elicit mobbing behaviour. Using the experimental design that maximised mobbing response in harriers, we then focused on the sequence and the specific behaviours involved in recruitment of mobbers, and whether individual investment in terms of defence was associated with phenotypic characteristics of individuals (i.e. sex, age and colour morph). We found that the main behaviour involved in successfully attracting mobbers was alarm calling. We also detected differential individual investment in relation to sex and age, but more importantly, we provide the first evidence for specialised male phenotypic roles during mobbing events, signalled by colour polymorphism: grey males tended not to be involved in mobbing and almost never behaved as recruiters or mobbers, while brown males behaved mainly as recruiter birds. These findings suggest that colour morph may signal the individual’s anti-predatory abilities through different behavioural strategies between males.

Keywords

Mobbing Anti-predator strategy Polymorphism Circus aeruginosus Raptor Phenotypic specialisation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Particular thanks are due to F. Picaud and W. Huin for their participation in field work and to C. Bavoux and several trainees and volunteers of Le Marais aux Oiseaux for their dedicated help during communal roost counts. We are grateful to David Carslake for commenting and improving the English of a first draft. We thank Beatriz Arroyo, Alexandre Roulin and in particular Gary Bortolotti for their very useful comments on a previous draft. We also wish to thank Mickael Griesser for his very helpful comments and insights on our manuscript.

References

  1. Alexander RD (1974) The evolution of social behaviour. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 5:325–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Altmann SA (1956) Avian mobbing behavior and predator recognition. Condor 58:241–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arroyo B, Mougeot F, Bretagnolle V (2001) Colonial breeding and nest defence in Montagu’s harrier (Circus pygargus). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 50:109–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bavoux C, Burneleau G, Cuisin J, Nicolau-Guillaumet P (1991) Le Busard des roseaux Circus aeruginosus en Charente-Maritime (France). IV. Variabilité du plumage juvénile. Alauda 59:248–255Google Scholar
  5. Bavoux C, Burneleau G, Nicolau-Guillaumet P, Picard M (1993) Le Busard des roseaux Circus aeruginosus en Charente-Maritime (France). VI. Couleur de l’iris, sexe et âge. Alauda 61:173–179Google Scholar
  6. Bavoux C, Burneleau G, Picard M (1997) Le gîte nocturne du Busard des roseaux Circus aeruginosus. Modalités de fréquentation en Charente-Maritime (France). Alauda 65:337–342Google Scholar
  7. Bavoux C, Burneleau G, Bretagnolle V (2006) Sexing European marsh harrier Circus aeruginosus using morphometrics and discriminant analyses. J Rapt Res 40:57–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bradbury JW, Vehrencamp SL (1998) Principles of animal communication. Sinauer, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  9. Brown GE (2003) Learning about danger: chemical alarm cues and local risk assessment in prey fishes. Fish Fish 4:227–234Google Scholar
  10. Caro TM (2005) Antipredator defences in birds and mammals. Chicago University Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  11. Charnov EL, Krebs JR (1975) The evolution of alarm calls: altruism or manipulation? Am Nat 109:107–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Collias NE, Collias EC (1978) Group territory, dominance, co-operative breeding in birds, and a new factor. Anim Behav 26:308–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Conover MR (1987) Acquisition of predator information by active and passive mobbers in ringed-billed gull colonies. Behaviour 102:41–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cramp S, Simmons KEL (1980) The birds of the western Paleartic, volume 2. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  15. Curio E (1978) The adaptive significance of avian mobbing I. Telenomic hypothesis and predictions. Z Tierpsychol 48:175–183Google Scholar
  16. Curio E, Klump G, Regelmann K (1983) An anti-predator response in the great tit (Parus major): is it tuned to the predator risk? Oecologia 60:83–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Curio E, Regelmann K, Zimmermann U (1985) Brood defence in the great tit (Parus major): the influence of the life-history and habitat. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 16:273–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Desrochers A, Bélisle M, Bourque J (2002) Do mobbing calls affect the perception of predation risk by forest birds? Anim Behav 64:709–714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ducrest AL, Keller L, Roulin A (2008) Pleiotropy in the melanocortin system, coloration and behavioural syndromes. Trends Ecol Evol 23:502–510CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Dugatkin LA, Godin JGJ (1992) Prey approaching predators: a cost–benefit perspective. Ann Zool Fenn 29:233–252Google Scholar
  21. Ellis JMS (2008) Which call parameters signal threat to conspecifics in white-throated magpie–jay mobbing calls? Ethology 114:154–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fargallo JA, Laaksonen T, Korpimäki E, Wakamatsu A (2007) Melanin-based trait reflects environmental growth conditions of nestling male Eurasian kestrels. Evol Ecol 21:157–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ferguson-Lees J, Christie DA (2001) Raptors of the world. Christopher Helm, LondonGoogle Scholar
  24. Forsman D (2008) The raptors of Europe and the Middle East. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  25. Francis AM, Hailman JP, Woolfenden GE (1989) Mobbing by Florida scrub jays: behaviour, sexual asymmetry, role of helpers and ontogeny. Anim Behav 38:795–816CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Frankenberg E (1981) The adaptive significance of avian mobbing. IV. “Alerting others” and “Perception advertisement” in blackbirds facing owl. Z Tierpsychol 55:97–118Google Scholar
  27. Graw B, Manser MB (2007) The function of mobbing in cooperative meerkats. Anim Behav 74:507–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Griesser M (2008) Referential calls signal predator behaviour in a group-living bird species. Curr Biol 18:69–73CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Griesser M (2009) Mobbing calls signal predator category in a kin group-living bird species. Proc R Soc B 276:2887–2892CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Griesser M, Ekman J (2005) Nepotistic mobbing behaviour in the Siberian jay, Perisoreus infaustus. Anim Behav 69:345–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Haase E, Ito S, Sell A, Wakamatsu K (1992) Melanin concentrations in feathers from wild and domestic pigeons. J Hered 83:64–67Google Scholar
  32. Hass CC, Valenzuela D (2002) Anti-predator benefits of group living in white-nosed coatis (Nasua narica). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 51:570–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hasson O (1991) Pursuit deterrent signals—communication between prey and predator. Trends Ecol Evol 6:325–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Helfman GS (1989) Threat-sensitive predator avoidance in damselfish–trumpetfish interactions. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 24:47–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hill WL (1991) Correlates of male mating success in the ruff Philomachus pugnax, a lekking shorebird. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 29:367–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hill RA, Dunbar RIM (1998) An evaluation of the roles of predation rate and predation risk as selective pressures on primate grouping behaviour. Behaviour 135:411–430Google Scholar
  37. Hurd CR (1996) Interspecific attraction to the mobbing calls of blackcapped chickadees (Parus atricapillus). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 38:287–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Jawor JM, Breitwisch R (2003) Melanin ornaments, honesty, and sexual selection. Auk 120:249–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Jones K, Hill WL (2001) Auditory perception of hawks and owls for passerine alarm calls. Ethology 107:717–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Knight RL, Temple SA (1988) Nest-defense behavior in the red-winged blackbird. Condor 90:193–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Krams I, Krama T, Igaune K, Mand R (2007) Long-lasting mobbing of the pied flycatcher increases the risk of nest predation. Behav Ecol 18:1082–1084CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Krams I, Krama T, Igaune K, Maend R (2008) Experimental evidence of reciprocal altruism in the pied flycatcher. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 62:599–605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lank DB, Smith CM, Hanotte O, Burke T, Cooke F (1995) Genetic polymorphism for alternative mating behaviour in lekking male ruff Philomachus pugnax. Nature 378:59–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lima SL (2009) Predators and the breeding bird: behavioural and reproductive flexibility under the risk of predation. Biol Rev 84:485–513CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Lima SL, Dill LM (1990) Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. Can J Zool 68:619–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Maklakov AA (2002) Snake-directed mobbing in a cooperative breeder: anti-predator behaviour or self-advertisement for the formation of dispersal coalitions? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 52:372–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Marler P (1957) Specific distinctiveness in the communication signals of birds. Behaviour 11:13–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. McGraw KJ, Safran RJ, Wakamatsu K (2005) How feather colour reflects its melanin content. Funct Ecol 19:816–821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Moholt RK, Trost C (1989) Self-advertisement: relations to dominance in black-billed magpies. Anim Behav 38:1079–1088CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Morgan C, Thomas RE, Ma W, Novotny MV, Cone RD (2004) Melanocortin-5 receptor deficiency reduces a pheromonal signal for aggression in male mice. Chem Senses 29:111–115CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Negro JJ, Bortolotti GR, Sarasola JH (2007) Deceptive plumage signals in birds: manipulation of predators or prey? Biol J Linn Soc 90:467–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ostreiher R (2003) Is mobbing altruistic or selfish behaviour? Anim Behav 66:145–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Owings DH, Coss RG (1977) Snake mobbing by California ground squirrels—adaptive variation and ontogeny. Behaviour 62:50–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Roulin A (2004) The evolution, maintenance and adaptive function of genetic colour polymorphism in birds. Biol Rev 79:1–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Ruxton GD, Sherratt TN, Speed MP (2004) Avoiding attack: the evolutionary ecology of crypsis, warning signals and mimicry. New York University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  56. Institute SAS (2001) SAS user's guide. SAS Institute, CaryGoogle Scholar
  57. Seyfarth RM, Cheney DL, Marler P (1980) Monkey responses to three different alarm calls: evidence of predator classification and semantic communication. Science 210:801–803CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Simmons RE (2000) Harriers of the world. Their behaviour and ecology. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  59. Slagsvold T (1985) Mobbing behaviour of the hooded crow Corvus corone corvix in relation to age, sex, size, season, temperature and kind of enemy. Fauna Norvegica Ser C Cin 8:9–17Google Scholar
  60. Srivastava A (1991) Cultural transmission of snake-mobbing in free-ranging Hanuman langurs. Folia Primatol 56:117–120CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Sternalski A, Bavoux C, Burneleau G, Bretagnolle V (2008) Philopatry, natal and postnatal dispersal in a sedentary population of Marsh harriers Circus aeruginosus. J Zool 274:188–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Templeton CN, Greene E, Davis K (2005) Allometry of alarm calls: black-capped chickadees encode information about predator size. Science 308:1934–1937CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Tuttle EM (2003) Alternative reproductive strategies in the white-throated sparrow: behavioral and genetic evidence. Behav Ecol 14:425–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Welbergen JA, Davies NB (2008) Reed warblers discriminate cuckoos from sparrowhawks with graded alarm signals that attract mates and neighbours. Anim Behav 76:811–822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Wilson EO (1980) Sociobiology. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  66. Wolff GL (2003) Regulation of yellow pigment formation in mice: a historical perspective. Pig Cell Res 16:2–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Woodland DJ, Jaafar Z, Knight ML (1980) The “pursuit deterrent” function of alarm signals. Am Nat 115:748–753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wright J (1997) Helping-at-nest in Arabian babblers: signalling social status or sensible investment in chicks? Anim Behav 54:1439–1448CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Zahavi A (1995) Altruism as a handicap—limitations of kin selection and reciprocity. J Avian Biol 26:1–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Zahavi A, Zahavi A (1997) The handicap principle. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CEBC–CNRSBeauvoir-sur-NiortFrance

Personalised recommendations