Skip to main content

The effects of nesting stage, sex, and type of predator on parental defense by killdeer (Charadrius vociferous): testing models of avian parental defense

Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology volume 26, pages 181–190 (1990)Cite this article

Summary

Two models predicting the temporal patterns of parental investment in offspring defense over the nesting cycle were tested. The first is based on offspring age, the other on the vulnerability of offspring to predation. Both models make very similar predictions for altricial species after eggs have hatched, i.e., increases in intensity of parental defense until fledging. For precocial species, however, the post-hatching predictions of each model are different: the offspring age model predicts a continued increase in defense intensity, while the vulnerability model predicts a decline. I examined the temporal patterns of parental defense of a precocial shorebird, the killdeer (Charadrius vociferus), and determined which model was supported. Killdeer responses to human and natural predators were observed. Killdeer were less willing to leave the nest, responded most intensely, and displayed closest to a potential predator around hatching. Defense intensity increased from early to late incubation as predicted by the offspring age model. However, after hatching killdeer parental defense declined for both males and females, thus supporting the vulnerability model for this stage. Males and females responded significantly differently to all types of predators. Males took greater risks, remained on the nest longer, defended offspring more intensely, and displayed closer to the predator than females at the approach of a potential predator. Responses to natural predators depended on the type of predator and the approach made by the predator; a greater range of defense behavior was used for predators approaching on the ground compared to aerial predators. In general, killdeer responses to humans were more intense and less variable than their responses to natural predators. This was most likely because the human intruder approached nests and chicks more directly and closer than natural predators.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  • Andersson M, Wiklund CG, Rundgren H (1980) Parental defense of offspring: a model and an example. Anim Behav 28:536–542

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong EA (1956) Distraction display and the human predator. Ibis 98:641–654

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashkenazie S, Safriel UN (1979) Time-energy budget of the Semipalmated Sandpiper (Calidris pusilla) at Barrow, Alaska. Ecology 60:783–799

    Google Scholar 

  • Barash DP (1975) Evolutionary aspects of parental behavior: distraction display of the alpine accentor. Wilson Bull 87:367–373

    Google Scholar 

  • Bengtson SA (1970) Breeding behaviour of the Purple Sandpiper Calidris maritima in West Spitsbergen. Ornis Scand 1:17–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Bent AC (1929) Life histories of North American shorebirds. Part 2, US Natl Mus Bull 142

  • Biermann GC, Robertson RJ (1981) An increase in parental investment during the breeding season. Anim Behav 29:487–489

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown RG (1962) The aggressive and distraction display behavior of the Western Sandpiper Ereunetes mauri. Ibis 104:1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunton DH (1986) Fatal antipredator behavior by Killdeer. Wilson Bull 98(4):605–607

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunton DH (1987) Reproductive effort of male and female Killdeer (Charadrius vociferus). PhD dissertation University Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunton DH (1988a) Sexual differences in time budgets of Killdeer during the breeding season. Anim Behav 36:705–717

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunton DH (1988b) Energy expenditure in reproductive effort: the reproductive strategies of male and female Killdeer (Charadrius vociferus). Auk 105:553–564

    Google Scholar 

  • Buitron D (1983) Variability in the responses of Black-billed Magpies to natural predators. Behaviour 78:209–236

    Google Scholar 

  • Burger J (1981) Sexual differences in parental activities of breeding Black Skimmers. Am Nat 117:975–984

    Google Scholar 

  • Curio E (1975) The functional organization of antipredator behaviour in the Pied Flycatcher: a study of avian visual perception. Anim Behav 23:1–115

    Google Scholar 

  • Curio E, Regelmann K, Zimmerman U (1984) The defence of first and second broods by Great Tit (Parus major) parents: a test of predictive sociobiology. Z Tierpsychol 66:101–127

    Google Scholar 

  • East M (1981) Alarm calling and parental investment in the Robin, Erithacus rubecula. Ibis 123(2):223–230

    Google Scholar 

  • Erpino MJ (1968) Nest-related activities of Black-billed Magpies. Condor 70:154–165

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson F (1971) The breeding biology of the American Avocet Recurvirostra americana in central Oregon. Condor 73:444–454

    Google Scholar 

  • Gochfeld M (1984) Antipredator behavior: aggressive and distraction displays of shorebirds. In: Burger J, Olla BL (eds) Shorebirds: breeding behavior and populations. Plenum Publ. Corp., New York, pp 289–377

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottfried BM (1979) Anti-predator aggression in birds nesting in old field habitats: an experimental analysis. Condor 81:251–257

    Google Scholar 

  • Gramza A (1967) Responses of brooding Nighthawks to a disturbance stimulus. Auk 84:72–86

    Google Scholar 

  • Greig-Smith PW (1980) Parental investment in nest defense by Stonechats (Saxicola torquata). Anim Behav 28:604–619

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey PH, Greenwood PJ (1978) Antipredator defence by Stonechats (Saxicola torquata). Anim Behav 28:604–619

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobbs JN (1972) Breeding of Red-capped Dotterel at Fletcher's Lake Dareton, NSW. Emu 72:121–125

    Google Scholar 

  • Howe MA (1982) Social organization in a nesting population of eastern Willets (Catoptrophorus semipalmatus). Condor 84:88–102

    Google Scholar 

  • Hussell D, Page GW (1976) Observations on the breeding biology of the Black-bellied Plovers on Devon Island, N.W.T., Canada. Wilson Bull 88:632–653

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones A (1979) Notes on the behaviour of the Variable Oystercatcher. Notornis 26:47–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Jourdain FC (1936) The so-called injury feigning in birds. Oologists Rec 16:25–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Komeda S (1983) Nest attendance of parent birds in the Painted Snipe. Auk 100:48–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruuk H (1964) Predators and anti-predator behavior of the Black-headed Gull (Larus ridibundus L.). Behav Suppl 11:1–129

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson S (1960) On the influence of the Arctic fox (Alopex lagopus) on the distribution of Arctic birds. Oikos 11:277–305

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazarus J, Inglis IR (1986) Shared and unshared parental investment, parent-offspring conflict and brood size. Anim Behav 34:1791–1804

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemmetyinen R (1971) Nest defence behaviour of Common and Arctic Terns and its effects on the success achieved by predators. Ornis Fenn 48:13–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenington S (1980) Bi-parental care in Killdeer: an adaptive hypothesis. Wilson Bull 92(1):8–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Maclean GL (1973) A review of the biology of the Australian Desert Waders, Stilta and Peltohyas. Emu 73:61–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Maxson SJ, Oring LW (1980) Breeding season time and energy budgets of the polyandrous Spotted Sandpiper. Behaviour 74:200–263

    Google Scholar 

  • Merritt PG (1984) Observer recognition by the Northern Mockingbird. J Field Ornithol 55:252–253

    Google Scholar 

  • Montevecchi W, Porter J (1980) Parental care and related behavior before fledging in Northern Gannets (Morus bassanus) with reference to other marine birds. In: Burger J, Olla B, Winn H (eds) Behavior of marine animals. Vol. VI. Marine birds. Plenum Press, New York, pp 323–366

    Google Scholar 

  • Montgomerie RD, Weatherhead PJ (1988) Risks and rewards of nest defence by parental birds. Q Rev Biol 63:167–187

    Google Scholar 

  • Mundahl JT (1982) Role specialization in the parental and territorial behavior of the Killdeer. Wilson Bull 94(4):515–530

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers JP (1978) One deleterious effect of mobbing in the Southern Lapwing (Vanellus chilensis). Auk 95:419

    Google Scholar 

  • Nol E (1980) Factors affecting the nesting success of the Killdeer (Charadrius vociferus) on Long Point, Ontario. M.S. thesis, University Guelph, Guelph, Ontario

    Google Scholar 

  • Nol E, Lambert A (1984) Comparison of Killdeer, Charadrius vociferus, breeding in Mainland and peninsula sites in Southern Ontario. Can Field Nat 98:7–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson TL, Petrinovich L, James DK (1980) Reproductive value and appropriateness of response to predators by White-crowned Sparrows. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 7:227–231

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips RE (1972) Sexual and agonistic behavior in the Killdeer (Charadrius vociferus). Anim Behav 20:1–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierotti R (1981) Male and female parental roles in the Western Gull under different environmental conditions. Auk 98:532–549

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratcliffe DA (1977) Observations on the breeding of the Golden Plover in Great Britain. Bird Study 23:63–116

    Google Scholar 

  • Regelmann K, Curio E (1983) Determinants of brood defence in the Great Tit Parus major L. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 13:131–145

    Google Scholar 

  • Shields WM (1984) Barn Swallow mobbing: self-defence, collateral kin defence, group defence, or parental care? Anim Behav 32:132–148

    Google Scholar 

  • Simmons KEL (1955) The nature of the predator reactions of waders towards humans, with special reference to the role of the aggressive-, escape- and brooding-drives. Behaviour 8:130–173

    Google Scholar 

  • Skutch AF (1949) Do tropical birds rear as many young as they can nourish? Ibis 91:430–455

    Google Scholar 

  • Trivers RL (1972) Parental investment and sexual selection. In: Campbell B (ed) Sexual selection and the descent of man, 1871–1971. Aldine Press, Chicago, pp 136–179

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogt W (1938) Preliminary notes on the behavior and ecology of the eastern Willet. Proc Linn Soc NY 49:8–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Walters JR (1982) Parental Behavior in Lapwings (Charadriidae) and its relationships with clutch sizes and mating systems. Evolution 36:1030–1040

    Google Scholar 

  • Weatherhead PJ (1979) Do Savannah Sparrows commit the Concorde Fallacy? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 5:373–381

    Google Scholar 

  • Weatherhead PJ (1982) Risk-taking by red-winged blackbirds and the Concorde Fallacy. Z Tierpsychol 60:199–208

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Dianne H. Brunton

    Present address: Department of Biology, Yale University, OML, P.O. Box 6666, 06511-7444, New Haven, CT, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Natural Resources, University of Michigan, 48109-1115, Ann Arbor, Michigan, MI, USA

    Dianne H. Brunton

Authors
  1. Dianne H. Brunton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brunton, D.H. The effects of nesting stage, sex, and type of predator on parental defense by killdeer (Charadrius vociferous): testing models of avian parental defense. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 26, 181–190 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00172085

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00172085

Keywords

  • Defend
  • Temporal Pattern
  • Great Range
  • Parental Investment
  • Potential Predator