Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Settlement decisions in blue tits: difference in the use of social information according to age and individual success

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Naturwissenschaften Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Dispersers are expected to assess breeding habitat quality before settlement. Although cues reflecting habitat quality are well studied, social cues have not been as well evaluated. In this paper, we studied breeding habitat selection during 3 years in a natural population of blue tits, Cyanistes caeruleus, breeding in nest-boxes. Our aim was to investigate if this species used conspecific density and/or reproductive success of con- and heterospecifics (i.e., social cues) in settlement decisions. The patterns observed were consistent with the idea that juveniles, when dispersing from their natal patches, did not react to any of the cues that we tested. In contrast, breeders that dispersed seemed to respond to both conspecific mean patch reproductive success (PRS) and breeding density of the settlement patch in the year of dispersal, their response differing according to their own reproductive success. Indeed, failed breeders moved to areas with high PRS and low density relative to source patches, while successful breeders behaved the opposite. The comparison between juveniles and adults might be modulated by the limited time available to juveniles to gather information on PRS and density at the end of the dispersing year. Adults lacking these time constraints, however, seemed to rely on these conspecific cues although limited by their own quality. Additionally, breeders were more likely to be immigrants in patches with relatively low breeding success and density the previous year, suggesting that settlement is influenced by multiple cues, which may reveal information on different aspects of habitat and be available at different moments. Collectively, our results support the importance of social cues for blue tits’ settlement.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andreu J, Barba E (2006) Breeding dispersal of great tits Parus major in a homogeneous habitat: effects of sex, age and mating status. Ardea 94:45–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Boulinier T, Danchin E (1997) The use of conspecific reproductive success for breeding patch selection in territorial migratory species. Evol Ecol 11:505–517

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boulinier T, McCoy K, Sorci G (2001) Dispersal and parasitism. In: Clobert J, Danchin E, Dhondt AA, Nichols JD (eds) Dispersal. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 169–179

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown CR, Brown MB (1996) Coloniality in the cliff swallow. The effect of group size on social behaviour. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark RG, Shutler D (1999) Avian habitat selection: pattern from process in nest-site use by ducks? Ecology 80:272–287

    Google Scholar 

  • Clobert J, Danchin E, Dhondt AA, Nichols JD (eds) (2001) Dispersal. Oxford University Press

  • Coolen I, Ward AJW, Hart PJB, Laland KN (2005) Foraging nine-spined sticklebacks prefer to rely on public information over simpler social cues. Behav Ecol 16:865–870

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cramp S, Perrins D (eds) (1993) Handbook of the birds of Europe, the Middle East and North Africa: the birds of the western Palaearctic. Oxford University Press

  • Danchin E, Boulinier T, Massot M (1998) Conspecific reproductive success and breeding habitat selection: implications for the study of coloniality. Ecology 79:2415–2428

    Google Scholar 

  • Danchin E, Giraldeau LA, Valone TJ, Wagner RH (2004) Public information: from nosy neighbours to cultural evolution. Science 305:487–491

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Davis JM, Stamps JA (2004) The effect of natal experience on habitat preferences. Trends Ecol Evol 19:411–416

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Delestrade A, Mcleery RH, Perrins CM (1996) Natal dispersal in a heterogeneous environment: the case of the great tit in Wytham. Acta Oecol 17:519–529

    Google Scholar 

  • Dhondt AA, Adriaensen F (1994) Causes and effects of divorce in the blue tit Parus caeruleus. J Anim Ecol 63:979–987

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dhondt AA, Schillemans J, Delaet J (1982) Blue tit territories in populations at different density levels. Ardea 70:185–188

    Google Scholar 

  • Dingemanse NJ, Both C, Noordwijk AJv, Rutten AL, Drent PJ (2003) Natal dispersal and personalities in great tits (Parus major). Proc R Soc Lond B 270:741–747

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doligez B, Danchin E, Clobert J, Gustafsson L (1999) The use of conspecific reproductive success for breeding habitat selection in a non-colonial, hole-nesting species, the collared flycatcher. J Anim Ecol 68:1193–1206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doligez B, Danchin E, Clobert J (2002) Public information and breeding habitat selection in a wild bird population. Science 297:1168–1170

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Doligez B, Cadet C, Danchin E, Boulinier T (2003) When to use public information for breeding habitat selection? The role of environmental predictability and density dependence. Anim Behav 66:973–988

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doligez B, Part T, Danchin E, Clobert E, Gustafsson L (2004) Availability and use of public information and conspecific density for settlement decisions in the collared flycatcher. J Anim Ecol 73:75–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forsman JT, Seppanen JT, Mönkkönen M (2002) Positive fitness consequences of interspecific interaction with a potential competitor. Proc R Soc Lond B 269:1619–1623

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fretwell D, Lucas HL Jr (1970) On territorial behavior and other factors influencing habitat distribution in birds. I. Theoretical development. Acta Biotheor 19:16–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I (1999) Habitat connectivity, habitat continuity, and metapopulations in dynamic landscapes. Oikos 87:209–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jakob EM, Porter AH, Uetz GW (2001) Site fidelity and the costs of movement among territories: an example from colonial web-building spiders. Can J Zool 79:2094–2100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larsen KW, Boutin S (1994) Movements, survival, and settlement of red squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus) offspring. Ecology 75:214–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Littell RC, Milliken GA, Stroup WW, Wolfinger RD (1996) SAS system for mixed models. SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthysen E, Adriaensen F, Dhondt AA (2001) Local recruitment of great and blue tits (Parus major, P. caeruleus) in relation to study plot and degree of isolation. Ecography 24:33–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller KL, Stamps JA, Krishnan VV, Willits NH (1997) The effects of conspecific attraction and habitat quality on habitat selection in territorial birds (Troglodytes aedon). Am Nat 150:650–661

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nocera JJ, Forbes GJ, Giraldeau L-A (2006) Inadvertent social information in breeding site selection of natal dispersing birds. Proc R Soc Lond B 273:349–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nur N (1988) The consequences of brood size for breeding blue tits. III. Measuring the costs of reproduction: survival, future fecundity, and differential dispersal. Evolution 42:351–362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orians GH, Wittenberger JF (1991) Spatial and temporal scales in habitat selection. Am Nat 137:S29–S49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pampus M, Schmidt KH, Wiltschko W (2005) Pair bond and breeding success in blue tits Parus caeruleus and great tits Parus major. Ibis 147:92–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parejo D, Danchin E (2006) Brood size manipulation affects the frequency of second clutches in the blue tit. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 60:184–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parejo D, Danchin E, Avilés JM (2005) The heterospecific habitat copying hypothesis: can competitors indicate habitat quality? Behav Ecol 16:96–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed JM, Oring LW (1992) Reconnaissance for future breeding sites by spotted sandpipers. Behav Ecol 3:310–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed JM, Boulinier T, Danchin E, Oring LW (1999) Informed dispersal. Prospecting by birds for breeding sites. Current Ornithology 15:189–259

    Google Scholar 

  • Schjørring S, Gregersen J, Bregnballe T (2000) Sex difference in criteria determining fidelity towards breeding sites in the great cormorant. J Anim Ecol 69:214–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stamps JA (1988) Conspecific attraction and aggregation in territorial species. Am Nat 131:329–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson RL, Forsman JT, Mönkkönen M (2003) Positive interactions between migrant and resident birds: testing the heterospecific attraction hypothesis. Oecologia 134:431–438

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tinbergen JM (2005) Biased estimates of fitness consequences of brood size manipulation through correlated effects on natal dispersal. J Anim Ecol 74:1112–1120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Bergen Y, Coolen I, Laland KN (2004) Nine-spined sticklebacks exploit the most reliable source when public and private information conflict. Proc R Soc Lond B 271:957–962

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verhulst S, Perrins CM, Riddington R (1997) Natal dispersal of great tits in a patchy environment. Ecology 78:846–872

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward MP (2005) Habitat selection by dispersing yellow-headed blackbirds: evidence of prospecting and the use of public information. Oecologia 145:650–657

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Whiting MJ, Greef JM (1999) Use of heterospecific cues by the lizard Platysaurus broadleyi for food location. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 45:420–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank all people who collaborated in data collection: A. Dreiss, I. Dworzynska, J. Forinchon, M. Geier, S. Legendre, S. Limam, A. Millon, T. Mirmont, J. Pater, L. Pomarede, M. Xavier, and many others. J. Avilés provided useful comments on the manuscript. One anonymous referee and J. J. Nocera also provided very interesting suggestions for the manuscript. Bird capture and ringing were done under Ringing Licence (CRBPO Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle). Fieldwork was done under permission of Parc Naturel Régional de la Forêt d’Orient and French Office National des Forêts. This research work was partially supported by a Postdoctoral Marie Curie fellowship (contract HPMF-CT-2000-00716) to D. Parejo. During writing, D. Parejo was funded by the European Social Fund with an I3P contract in the C.S.I.C. This project was funded by the French Ministère de l’Environnement (Convention GIP ECOFOR, contract number DRITT: C02178) and the UMR 7625 (Fonctionnement et Évolution des Systèmes Écologiques, Paris), as well as the GDR 2155 “Écologie Comportementale.”

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Functional and Evolutionary Ecology, Estación Experimental de Zonas Áridas, C.S.I.C., C/ General Segura, 1, 04001, Almeria, Spain

    Deseada Parejo

  2. Department of Evolution et Diversité Biologique (EDB), UMR CNRS-UPS 5174, Université Paul Sabatier, Toulouse III, 118 Route de Narbonne, Bat IV R3, 31062, Toulouse Cedex 9, France

    Joel White & Etienne Danchin

Authors
  1. Deseada Parejo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joel White
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Etienne Danchin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Deseada Parejo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Parejo, D., White, J. & Danchin, E. Settlement decisions in blue tits: difference in the use of social information according to age and individual success. Naturwissenschaften 94, 749–757 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00114-007-0253-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00114-007-0253-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation