Flock-mate familiarity affects note composition of chickadee calls
Recent theory in animal communication predicts that a group’s communicative complexity is connected to its social complexity. Social complexity has typically been measured using group size as an index, with larger groups thought to be more complex than smaller groups. However, group size alone does not account for other social differences that could influence the diversity of interactions within a group that may influence communication. In this study, we asked if other social factors could influence communicative behavior in groups by testing the influence of group composition in the Carolina chickadees, Poecile carolinensis. We recorded the vocal behavior of four wild-caught captive groups of familiar chickadees (birds caught from the same naturally occurring flock) and four wild-caught captive groups of unfamiliar chickadees (birds caught from all different naturally occurring flocks) and then analyzed vocalizations by assessing the note types birds used in their chickadee calls. Flocks of familiar chickadees used fewer introductory notes, more C notes, and fewer hybrid notes in their calls compared to flocks of unfamiliar chickadees. Communicative complexity, measured by zero- and first-order uncertainty, did not differ between conditions. We conclude that note composition of call, but not call complexity, varies with flock-mate familiarity.
KeywordsCommunication Communicative complexity Social complexity Chickadee
We thank Anasthasia Sanchez de-Launay for the assistance with data collection in this study and thank Hwayoung Jung, Steven Kyle, Harry Pepper, and two anonymous reviewers for the helpful comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript. This work was supported by the National Science Foundation-IOS 1353327 to TMF.
- Bartmess-LeVasseur J, Branch CL, Browning SA, Owens JL, Freeberg TM (2010) Predator stimuli and calling behavior of Carolina chickadees (Poecile carolinensis), tufted titmice (Baeolophus bicolor), and white-breasted nuthatches (Sitta carolinensis). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 64:1187–1198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hailman JP (1989) The organization of major vocalizations in the Paridae. Wilson Bulletin 101:305–343Google Scholar
- Hailman, J. P., & Ficken, M. S. (1996). Comparative analysis of vocal repertoires, with reference to chickadees. In: D. E. Kroodsma and E. H. Miller (Eds.), Ecology and Evolution of Acoustic Communication in Birds, pp 136–159. Ithaca, NY; Cornell University PressGoogle Scholar
- McComb K, Semple S (2005) Coevolution of vocal communication and sociality in primates. Biol Lett 1(4):381–385Google Scholar