Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 67, Issue 6, pp 905–911 | Cite as

Temporal peaks in social information: prospectors investigate conspecific nests after a simulated predator visit

  • Robert L. Thomson
  • Päivi M. Sirkiä
  • Alexandre Villers
  • Toni Laaksonen
Original Paper

Abstract

Individuals of many taxa gather social information in order to make informed decisions with lowered unpredictability. Social information may show temporal periods of higher information value during certain events. However, the value of information is expected to decrease with time since the event and individuals accessing this information are expected to do so quickly. In birds, prospectors visit the nests of other individuals to gather information about reproductive decisions and breeding success. Individuals are known to prospect even during their own breeding to access this information. We investigated prospecting behavior of pied flycatchers (Ficedula hypoleuca) at conspecific nests within a short time period following a simulated predator visit. We performed predator and control presentations at flycatcher nests, and recorded all prospectors (foreign conspecific individuals) visiting these nests within 45-min periods before and after the presentations. We found a significant increase in conspecific prospectors visiting focal nests after the presentation of a predator near the nest. The prospectors in our data comprised mainly pied flycatchers actively breeding in the neighborhood of the focal nest. We also found that the increase in prospecting at these nests is of short-duration, and that prospecting rates decreased back to background prospecting levels relatively quickly. Our results find support for the prediction that individuals may respond to temporally peaking value of information after certain observable events. This result suggests that prospecting may be especially aimed at specific periods of high information value.

Keywords

Public information Prospecting Habitat selection Predation risk Offspring investment Eavesdropping 

References

  1. Betts MG, Hadley AS, Rodenhouse N, Nocera JJ (2008) Social information trumps vegetation structure in breeding-site selection by a migrant songbird. Proc R Soc Lond B 275:2257–2263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boulinier T, Danchin E, Monnat J-Y, Doutrelant C, Cadiou B (1996) Timing of prospecting and the value of information in a colonial breeding bird. J Avian Biol 27:252–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dall SRX, Giraldeau LA, Olsson O, McNamara JM, Stephens DW (2005) Information and its use by animals in evolutionary ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 20:187–193PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Danchin E, Giraldeau LA, Valone TJ, Wagner RH (2004) Public information: from nosy neighbors to cultural evolution. Science 305:487–491PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Doligez B, Danchin E, Clobert J (2002) Public information and breeding habitat selection in a wild bird population. Science 297:1168–1170PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Doligez B, Part T, Danchin E (2004) Prospecting in the collared flycatcher: gathering public information for future breeding habitat selection? Anim Behav 67:457–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fontaine JJ, Martin TE (2006a) Habitat selection responses of parents to offspring predation risk: an experimental test. Am Nat 168:811–818PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fontaine JJ, Martin TE (2006b) Parent birds assess nest predation risk and adjust their reproductive strategies. Ecol Lett 9:428–434PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Forsman JT, Seppänen J-T (2011) Learning what (not) to do: testing rejection and copying of simulated heterospecific behavioural traits. Anim Behav 81:879–883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Forsman JT, Seppänen J-T, Nykänen IL (2012) Observed heterospecific clutch size can affect offspring investment decisions. Biol Lett 8:341–343PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Forsman JT, Thomson RL (2008) Evidence of information collection from heterospecifics in cavity-nesting birds. Ibis 150:409–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Forsman JT, Thomson RL, Seppänen J-T (2007) Mechanisms and fitness effects of interspecific information use between resident and migrant birds. Behav Ecol 18:888–894CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hetrick SA, Sieving KE (2012) Antipredator calls of tufted titmice and interspecific transfer of encoded threat information. Behav Ecol 23:83–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Huhta E, Rytkönen S, Solonen T (2003) Plumage brightness of prey increases predation risk: an among-species comparison. Ecology 84:1793–1799CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Krams I, Bērziņš A, Krama T, Wheatcroft D, Igaune K, Rantala M (2010) The increased risk of predation enhances cooperation. Proc R Soc Lond B 277:513–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lima SL (2009) Predators and the breeding bird: behavioural and reproductive flexibility under the risk of predation. Biol Rev 84:485–513PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ottosson U, Bäckman J, Smith HG (2001) Nest-attenders in the pied flycatcher (Ficedula hypoleuca) during nestling rearing: a possible case of prospective resource exploration. Auk 118:1069–1072Google Scholar
  18. Parejo D, Pérez-Contreras T, Navarro C, Soler JJ, Avilés JM (2008) Spotless starlings rely on public information while visiting conspecific nests: an experiment. Anim Behav 75:483–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pärt T, Arlt D, Doligez B, Low M, Qvarnström A (2011) Prospectors combine social and environmental information to improve habitat selection and breeding success in the subsequent year. J Anim Ecol 80:1227–1235PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pärt T, Doligez B (2003) Gathering public information for habitat selection: prospecting birds cue on parental activity. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:1809–1813CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pöysä H (2006) Public information and conspecific nest parasitism in goldeneyes: targeting safe nests by parasites. Behav Ecol 17:459–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. R Development Core Team 2012. R: A language and environment for statistical computing R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria. Available at: http://www.R-project.org
  23. Reed JM, Boulinier T, Danchin E, Oring LW (1999) Informed dispersal: prospecting by bird for breeding sites. Curr Ornithol 15:189–259Google Scholar
  24. Rytkönen S, Kuokkanen P, Hukkanen M, Huhtala K (1998) Prey selection by sparrowhawks Accipiter nisus and characteristics of vulnerable prey. Ornis Fenn 75:77–87Google Scholar
  25. Seppänen J-T, Forsman JT, Mönkkönen M, Krams I, Salmi T (2011) New behavioural trait adopted or rejected by observing heterospecific tutor fitness. Proc R Soc Lond B 278:1736–1741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Seppänen J-T, Forsman JT, Mönkkönen M, Thomson RL (2007) Social information use is a process across time, space and ecology, reaching heterospecifics. Ecology 88:1622–1633PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Thomson RL, Forsman JT, Sardá-Palomera F, Mönkkönen M (2006) Fear factor: prey habitat selection and its consequences in a predation risk landscape. Ecography 29:507–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ward MP (2005) Habitat selection by dispersing yellow-headed blackbirds: evidence of prospecting and the use of public information. Oecologia 145:650–657PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wood SN (2006) Generalized additive models: an introduction with R. Chapman & HallGoogle Scholar
  30. Zuur AF, Ieno EN, Walker N, Smith GM, Saveliev AA (2009) Mixed effects models and extensions with R. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert L. Thomson
    • 1
  • Päivi M. Sirkiä
    • 1
  • Alexandre Villers
    • 1
  • Toni Laaksonen
    • 1
  1. 1.Section of Ecology, Department of BiologyUniversity of TurkuTurkuFinland

Personalised recommendations