Journal of Ethology

, Volume 26, Issue 1, pp 99–112 | Cite as

Parental sex roles of Malaysian plovers during territory acquisition, incubation and chick-rearing

  • M. Yasué
  • P. Dearden


Shorebirds show high variability in parental care strategies among species, populations, and environments. Research on shorebird parental sex roles can help to understand the selective pressures that shape avian breeding strategies. Although several studies have examined parental care strategies in holarctic shorebirds, very little research has been conducted in the tropics. Here we examined parental sex roles during territorial defence, incubation, and chick-rearing in Malaysian plovers Charadrius peronii in the Gulf of Thailand. The costs and gains of particular parental behaviour may vary between the sexes and can be affected differently by environmental factors and chick age. Thus we also examined how temperature, prey availability, chick or embryo age, and time of day affected parental sex roles. Males spent more time defending territories and were further away from chicks whereas females spent more time incubating eggs. Both adults contributed to chick defence during disturbances throughout the entire chick-rearing period. Total nest attendance (sum of both sexes) was affected by the modelled temperature of an unincubated egg. Prey availability, embryo age, and time of day had no effect on total nest attendance. Males adjusted incubation effort in response to temperature only at high temperatures (>36°C) whereas females adjusted nest attendance at high and low temperatures. Chick age had no effect on the proportion of time adults spent defending territories or responding to disturbance. Pairs were more likely to fledge chicks if both the male and female spent more time defending territories. For Malaysian plovers, high cooperation between the sexes during parental care may help to achieve high quality breeding territories, maintain body conditions during hot days, protect offspring from predators and attacking conspecifics, and contribute to high lifetime reproductive success.


Incubation Parental care Plover Shorebird 



Thanks to anonymous referees, Nicholas Warren, Emily Howgate, Alan Burger, and Dov Lank for valuable suggestions and comments on previous drafts. Thanks to George Gale, Philip Round, Andrew Pierce, and Dhirayut Chenvidhya in Bangkok, staff at Khao Sam Roi Yod National Park, and the villagers of Bonok for equipment and logistical support, and to our field assistants Allison Patterson and Prathew Tonghom. M.Y. was supported by a PGS-D scholarship from NSERC, Canada and the research project was funded by a SSHRC, Canada research grant.


  1. Ackerman JT, Eadie JM (2003) Current versus future reproduction: an experimental test of parental investment decisions using nest desertion by mallards (Anas platyrhynchos). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 54:264–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amat JA, Masero JA (2004) How Kentish plovers, Charadrius alexandrinus, cope with heat stress during incubation. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 56:26–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amat JA, Visser GH, Perez-Hurtado A, Arroyo GM (2000) Brood desertion by female shorebirds: a test of the differential parental capacity hypothesis on Kentish plovers. Proc R Soc London B 267:2171–2176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Birkhead TR, Møller AP (1996) Monogamy and sperm competition in birds. In: Black JM (ed) Partnership in birds: the ecology of monogamy. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  5. Blomqvist D, Wallander J, Andersson M (2001) Successive clutches and parental roles in waders: the importance of timing in multiple clutch systems. Biol J Linnean Soc 74:549–555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Breitwisch R (1989) Power D (ed) Mortality patterns, sex ratios, and parental investment in monogamous birds. Plenum, New York, pp 1–50Google Scholar
  7. Brunton DH (1988) Energy expenditure in reproductive effort of male and female Killdeer. Auk 105:553–564Google Scholar
  8. Burger J (1981) Sexual differences in parental activities of breeding Black Skimmers. Am Nat 117:975–984CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burger J, Gochfeld M (1991) Human activity influence and diurnal and nocturnal foraging of sanderlings (Calidris alba). Condor 93:259–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carey C (1980) The ecology of avian incubation. BioScience 30:819–824CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clutton-Brock TH (1991) The evolution of parental care. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  12. Collar NJ, Mallari NAD, Tabaranza BR (1999) Threatened birds of the Phillippines. Bookmark, ManilaGoogle Scholar
  13. Conway CJ, Martin TE (2000) Effects of ambient temperature on avian incubation behavior. Behav Ecol 11:178–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cresswell W (1994) Flocking as an effective anti-predation strategy in redshanks, Tringa totanus. Anim Behav 47:433–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cuervo JJ (2003) Parental roles and mating system in the blackwinged stilt. Can J Zool 81:947–953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Daubenmire RR (1959) Canopy coverage method of vegetative analysis. Northwest Sci 33:43–64Google Scholar
  17. Double M, Cockburn A (2000) Pre-dawn infidelity: females control extra-pair mating in superb fairy-wrens. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 267:465–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dubois F, Cezilly F, Pagel M (1998) Mate fidelity and coloniality in waterbirds: a comparative analysis. Oecologia 116:433–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dunning JBJ, Bowers RK Jr (1990) Lethal temperatures in ash-throated flycatcher nests located in metal fence poles. J Field Ornithol 61:98–103Google Scholar
  20. Erckmann WJ (1983) The evolution of polyandry in shorebirds: an evaluation of hypotheses. In: Wasser SK (ed) Social behavior of female vertebrates. Academic Press, New York, pp 113–168Google Scholar
  21. Fraga RM, Amat JA (1996) Breeding biology of a Kentish plover (Charadrius alexandrinus) population in an inland saline lake. Ardeola 43:69–85Google Scholar
  22. Gochfeld M (1984) Antipredator behaviour: aggressive and distraction displays of shorebirds. In: Burger J, Olla BL (eds) Shorebirds: breeding behaviour and populations. Behaviour of marine animals. Current perspectives in research. Plenum, New York, vol 5, pp 289–377Google Scholar
  23. Graul WD (1973) Possible functions of head and breast markings in Charadriinae. Wilson Bull 85:60–70Google Scholar
  24. Graul WD (1976) Food fluctuations and multiple clutches in the mountain plover. Auk 93:166–167Google Scholar
  25. Gregory-Smith R (1998) Attempted predation on young Malaysian plovers Charadrius peronii by sand crabs. Forktail 14:79Google Scholar
  26. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S (2000) Applied logistic regression, 2nd edn. Wiley, TorontoGoogle Scholar
  27. Jehl JRJ (1973) Breeding biology and systematic relationship of the Stilt Sandpiper. Wilson Bull 85:115–147Google Scholar
  28. Johnson M, Beckmann JP, Oring LW (2002) Temperate breeding shorebirds copulate at night. Wader Study Group Bull 97:45–46Google Scholar
  29. Kosztolanyi A, Székely T (2002) Using a transponder system to monitor incubation routines of Snowy Plovers. J Field Ornithol 73:199–205Google Scholar
  30. Kosztolanyi A, Székely T, Cuthill IC (2003) Why do both parents incubate in the Kentish plover? Ethol 109:658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Martin TE (1996) Life history evolution in tropical and south temperate birds: what do we really know? J Avian Biol 27:263–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Martin P, Bateson P (1986) Measuring behaviour: an introductory guide. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  33. Mehl KR, Drake KL, Page GW, Sanzenbacher PM, Haig SM, Thompson JE (2003) Capture of breeding and wintering shorebirds with leg-hold noose-mats. J Field Ornithol 74:401–405Google Scholar
  34. Moreno J (2004) Avian reproduction in a Mediterranean context: contributions of ornithological research in Spain. Ardeola 51:51–70Google Scholar
  35. Nol E (1985) Sex roles in the American oystercatcher. Behaviour 95:232–260Google Scholar
  36. Norton DW (1972) Incubation schedules of four species of calidridine sandpipers at Barrow, Alaska. Condor 74:164–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Oring LW, Reed JM, Maxson SJ (1994) Copulation patterns and mate guarding in the sex-role reversed, polyandrous Spotted Sandpiper, Actitis macularia. Anim Behav 47:1065–1072CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Page GW, Stenzel LE, Winkler DW, Swarth CW (1983) Spacing out at Mono Lake: breeding success, nest density and predation in the Snowy Plover. Auk 100:13–24Google Scholar
  39. Pierce EP, Lifjeld JT (1998) High paternity without paternity-assurance behavior in the purple sandpiper, a species with high paternal investment. Auk 115:602–612Google Scholar
  40. Purdue JR (1976) Thermal environment of the nest and related parental behavior in Snowy Plovers, Charadrius alexandrinus. Condor 78:180–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Reynolds JD (1996) Animal breeding systems. TREE 11:68–72Google Scholar
  42. Reynolds JD, Székely T (1997) The evolution of parental care in shorebirds: life histories, ecology, and sexual selection. Behav Ecol 8:126–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Robson C (2002) Birds of Thailand. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  44. Sandercock BK, Lank DB, Cooke F (1999) Seasonal declines in the fecundity of Arctic breeding sandpipers: different tactics in two species with invariant clutch size. J Avian Biol 30:460–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Slagsvold T, Amundsen T, Dale S (1995) Cost and benefits of hatching asynchrony in blue tits Parus caeruleus. J Anim Ecol 64:563–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Smythies BE, Davison GWH (1999) The birds of Borneo, 4th edn. Kota Kina Balu Natural History Publications, BorneoGoogle Scholar
  47. SPSS for Windows 2001. Chicago, USAGoogle Scholar
  48. Sutherland WJ, Anderson CW (1993) Predicting the distribution of individuals and the consequences of habitat loss. The role of prey depletion. J Theor Biol 160:223–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Székely T, Cuthill IC (1999) Brood desertion in Kentish plover: the value of parental care. Behav Ecol 30:191–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Székely T, Lessells CM (1993) Mate change by kentish plovers Charadrius alexandrinus. Ornis Scand 24:317–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Székely T, Thomas GH, Cuthill IC (2006) Sexual conflict, ecology, and breeding systems in shorebirds. BioScience 56:801–808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Székely T, Williams TD (1995) Costs and benefits of brood desertion in female Kentish plovers, Charadrius alexandrinus. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 37:155–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Takahashi M, Suzuki N, Koga T (2001) Burrow defense behaviors in a sand-bubbler crab, Scopimera globosa, in relation to body size and prior residence. J Ethol 19:93–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Teoh V, Weston MA (2002) Hooded plover Thinornis rubricollis chick attacked by conspecifics. Victorian Natur 119:27–28Google Scholar
  55. Thibault M, McNeil R (1995) Day- and nighttime parental investment by incubation Wilson’s Plovers in a tropical environment. Can J Zool 73:879–886CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Thomas GH, Székely T, Sutherland WJ (2003) Publication bias in waders. Wader Study Group Bull 100:216–223Google Scholar
  57. Turpie J, Hockey PAR (1993) Comparative diurnal and nocturnal foraging behaviour and energy intake of premigratory grey plovers Pluvialis squatarola and whimbrels Numenius phaeopus in South Africa. Wader Study Group Bull 135:156–165Google Scholar
  58. Wallander J (2003) Sex roles during incubation in the common ringed plover. Condor 105:378–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wallander J, Andersson M (2003) Reproductive tactics of the ringed plover Charadrius hiaticula. J Avian Biol 34:259–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wallander J, Blomqvist D, Lifjeld JT (2001) Genetic and social monogamy—Does it occur without mate guarding in the ringed plover? Ethol 107:561–572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Walters JR (1982) Parental behavior in Lapwings (Charadriidae) and its relationships with clutch size and mating systems. Evol 36:1030–1040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Ward D (1990) Incubation temperatures and behavior of crowned, black-winged, and lesser black-winged plovers. Auk 107:10–17Google Scholar
  63. Warnock N, Oring LW (1996) Nocturnal nest attendance of Killdeers: more than meets the eye. Auk 113:502–504Google Scholar
  64. Warriner JS, Warriner JC, Page GW, Stenzel LE (1986) Mating system and reproductive success of a small population of polygamous Snowy Plovers. Wilson Bull 98:15–37Google Scholar
  65. Weatherhead PJ, Blouin-Demers G (2004) Understanding avian nest predation: why ornithologists should study snakes. J Avian Biol 11:178–188Google Scholar
  66. Webb DR (1987) Thermal tolerance of avian embryos: a review. Condor 89:874–898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Westneat DF, Sargent RC (1996) Sex and parenting: the effect of sexual conflict and parentage on parental strategies. TREE 11:87–91Google Scholar
  68. Weston MA, Elgar MA (2005a) Disturbance to brood-rearing Hooded Plover Thinornis rubricollis: responses and consequences. Bird Conserv Int 15:193–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Weston MA, Elgar MA (2005b) Parental care in Hooded Plovers (Thinornis rubricollis). Emu 105:283–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Wittenberger JF, Tilson RL (1980) The evolution of monogamy: hypothesis and evidence. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 11:197–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Yasué M (2006) The breeding ecology and potential impacts of habitat change on the Malaysian plover (Charadrius peronii) in the Gulf of Thailand. PhD Dissertation. University of Victoria, VictoriaGoogle Scholar
  72. Yasué M, Dearden P (2006a) Simultaneous biparental incubation of two nests by a pair of Malaysian plover Charadrius peronii. Wader Study Group Bull 109:121–122Google Scholar
  73. Yasué M, Dearden P (2006b) The effect of heat stress, predation risk and parental investment on Malaysian plover nest return times following a human disturbance. Biol Conserv 132:472–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Yasué M, Dearden P (2006c) The potential impact of tourism development on habitat availability and productivity of Malaysian plovers Charadrius peronii. J Appl Ecol 43:978–989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Zharikov Y, Nol E (2000) Mate guarding, and paternity in the semipalmated plover. Condor 102:231–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Zwarts L (1990) Increased prey availability drives premigration hyperphagia in whimbrels and allows them to leave the Banc d’Arguin, Mauritania, in time. Ardea 78:279–300Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Japan Ethological Society and Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Marine Protected Areas Research Group, Department of GeographyUniversity of VictoriaVictoriaCanada

Personalised recommendations