Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Scanning pattern of greater rheas, Rhea americana: collective vigilance would increase the probability of detecting a predator

  • Article
  • Published:
Journal of Ethology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many models using vigilance to predict the probability of detecting an approaching predator assumes that prey scanning events should be produced at random. Consequently, the length of intervals among successive scans must follow a negative exponential distribution. We analyzed the scanning behavior of the greater rhea, Rhea americana, which is a gregarious, flightless bird, in eastern Argentina. We investigated whether individual and/or collective scanning departed from random and whether this departure varied with group size. We used two simulation models based on observed scanning sequences to assess the effectiveness of vigilance on the individual and collective level when faced with an opportunistic or stalking predator. The analysis of 59 behavioral sequences of wild greater rheas foraging solitary or in groups of two to six or more individuals revealed that the inter-scan length of individual sequences significantly departed from random. In contrast, inter-scan intervals for collective vigilance were shorter than individual ones, but only fit the random expectation for groups of two and five individuals. Models showed that collective vigilance could increase the probability of detecting a predator, thereby reducing their vulnerability, independent of whether the predator uses a stalking or opportunistic approaching strategy.

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
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Beauchamp G (2006) Nonrandom patterns of vigilance in flocks of the greater flamingo, Phoenicopterus rubber rubber. Anim Behav 71:593–598

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bednekoff PA, Lima SL (1998) Randomness, chaos and confusion in the study of antidepredator vigilante. TREE 13:284–287

    Google Scholar 

  • Bednekoff PA, Lima SL (2002) Why are scanning patterns so variable? An overlooked question in the study of anti-predator vigilance. J Avian Biol 33:143–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertram BCR (1980) Vigilance and group size in ostriches. Anim Behav 28:278–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boland CRJ (2003) An experimental test of predator detection rates using groups of free-living emus. Ethology 109:209–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruning DF (1974) Social structure and reproductive behavior of the greater rhea. Living Bird 13:251–294

    Google Scholar 

  • Caraco T (1979) Time budgeting and group size: a test of theory. Ecology 60:618–627

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caraco T, Martindale S, Pulliam HR (1980) Avian flocking in the presence of a predator. Nature 285:400–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caro T (2005) Antipredator defenses in birds and mammals. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Carro ME, Fernández GJ (2008) Seasonal variation in social organisation and diurnal activity budget of the Greater Rhea (Rhea americana) in the Argentinean pampas. Emu 108:167–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cresswell W (1994) Flocking is an effective anti-predator strategy in redshanks, Tringa tetanus. Anim Behav 47:433–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cresswell W, Quinn JL, Whittingham MJ, Butler S (2003) Good foragers can also be good at detecting predators. Proc R Soc B 270:1069–1076

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dehn MM (1990) Vigilance for predators: detection and dilution effects. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 26:337–342

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebensperger LA, Hurtado MJ, Ramos-Jiliberto R (2006) Vigilance and collective detection of predators in Degus (Octodon degus). Ethology 112:879–887

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elcavage P, Caraco T (1983) Vigilante behavior in house sparrow flocks. Anim Behav 31:303–304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elgar MA (1989) Predator vigilance and group size in mammals and birds: a critical review of the empirical evidence. Biol Rev 64:13–33

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Elgar MA, Catterall CP (1981) Flocking and predator surveillance in house sparrows. Anim Behav 29:868–872

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernández GJ, Capurro AF, Reboreda JC (2003) Effect of group size on individual and collective vigilance in Greater Rheas. Ethology 109:413–425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernández-Juricic E, Erichsen JT, Kacelnik A (2004) Visual perception and social foraging in birds. TREE 19:25–31

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hart A, Lendrem DW (1984) Vigilance and scanning patterns in birds. Anim Behav 32:1216–1224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudson WH (1920) Birds of La Plata. JM Dent and Sons, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarman PJ (1987) Group size and activity in eastern grey kangaroos. Anim Behav 35:1044–1050

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramer M, Bell WR (1996) Comments on predictability and over differencing in vigilante sequences. Anim Behav 51:1175–1178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehner PN (1998) Handbook of ethological methods, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge U.K

    Google Scholar 

  • Lendrem DW (1983) Predation risk and vigilance in the blue tit (Parus caerulescens). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 13:9–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lendrem DW (1984) Flocking, feeding and predation risk: absolute and instantaneous feeding rates. Anim Behav 32:298–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lendrem DW, Stretch D, Metcalfe NB, Jones P (1986) Scanning for predators in the purple sandpiper: a time-dependent or time-independent process? Anim Behav 34:1577–1578

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lima SL (1987) Distance to cover, visual obstructions, and vigilance in house sparrows. Behaviour 102:231–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lima SL (1995) Collective detection of predatory attack by social foragers: fraught with ambiguity. Anim Behav 50:1097–1108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lima SL, Bednekoff PA (1999) Back to the basics of antipredatory vigilance: can nonvigilant animals detect attack? Anim Behav 58:537–543

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lima SL, Dill LM (1990) Behavioural decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. Can J Zool 68:619–640

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lind J, Cresswell W (2005) Determining the fitness consequences of antipredator behavior. Behav Ecol 16:945–956

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martella MB, Renison D, Navarro JL (1995) Vigilance in the greater rhea: effects of vegetation height and group size. J Field Ornithol 66:215–220

    Google Scholar 

  • Matis JH, Rubink WL, Makela M (1992) Use of the gamma distribution for predicting arrival times of invading insect populations. Environ Entomol 21:436–440

    Google Scholar 

  • Mermoz OL, García RM (2006) Distribuciones univariantes de probabilidad. Nueva Librería, Buenos Aires

    Google Scholar 

  • Pulliam HR (1973) On the advantages of flocking. J Theor Biol 38:419–422

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pulliam HR, Caraco T (1984) Living in groups: is there an optimal group size? In: Krebs JR, Davies NB (eds) Behavioural ecology, 2nd edn. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford, pp 127–147

    Google Scholar 

  • Reboreda JC, Fernández GJ (1997) Sexual, seasonal and group size differences in the allocation of time between vigilance and feeding in the Greater Rhea, Rhea americana. Ethology 103:198–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts G (1994) When to scan: an analysis of predictability in vigilance sequences using autoregression models. Anim Behav 38:771–777

    Google Scholar 

  • Scannell J, Roberts G, Lazarus J (2001) Prey scan at random to evade observant predators. Proc R Soc Lond B 268:541–547

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan KA (1985) Vigilance patterns in Downy woodpeckers. Anim Behav 33:328–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treherne JE, Foster WA (1981) Group transmission of predator avoidance behaviour in a marine insect: the Trafalgar effect. Anim Behav 29:911–917

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treves A (2000) Theory and method in studies of vigilance and aggregation. Anim Behav 60:711–722

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank V. Simoy and F. Milano for logistical support and field assistance at Ayacucho. M. Beade and M. Mermoz provided GJF with field assistance at General Lavalle. We thank J. Boote, R. Paso and A. Guzman for allowing us to perform the study on their cattle ranches. We also thank C. Battagliese for checking the English grammar and M. Mermoz and two anonymous reviewers for their comments on an earlier version of this MS. This study was supported by a grant of University of Buenos Aires to GJF (Programación UBACYT 2004–2007 X007).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratorio de Ecología y Comportamiento Animal, Departamento de Ecología, Genética y Evolución, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Int Guiraldes s/n, Pabellón II, Ciudad Universitaria, C1428EHA, Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Mariana E. Carro & Gustavo J. Fernández

Authors
  1. Mariana E. Carro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gustavo J. Fernández
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mariana E. Carro.

About this article

Cite this article

Carro, M.E., Fernández, G.J. Scanning pattern of greater rheas, Rhea americana: collective vigilance would increase the probability of detecting a predator. J Ethol 27, 429–436 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10164-008-0137-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10164-008-0137-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation