Abstract
Despite the success of kin selection in explaining helping-at-the-nest among communally breeding birds, we know almost nothing about how helpers regulate their chick-feeding effort. This is especially interesting given how much we now know about parental provisioning `rules-of-thumb' and the evolution of chick begging as an honest signal of `need'. This study explores the provisioning rules of helpers and parents in Arabian babblers (Turdoides squamiceps), using tape play-backs to supplement chick-begging signals and increase apparent brood demand. In all eight groups tested, both helpers and parents fed older, noisier broods at higher rates. Total provisioning rates to nests increased during begging play-back days compared to control days. Absolute provisioning rates by helpers and the scale of their responses to play-backs were statistically indistinguishable from those of parents. In both helpers and parents, increases in nest visits during play-backs were associated with reductions in foraging distance from the nest and increases in size of prey delivered. Older birds of both sexes delivered slightly larger prey items, possibly reflecting differences in foraging ability due to experience. These results are consistent with the idea that, like the parents, helpers-at-the-nest in Arabian babblers provision nestlings as part of a strategy of investment, irrespective of helper age, dominance status or sex. In this species, high relatedness within groups may provide parents and helpers with similar kin-selected fitness benefits, although the mutualistic advantages to helpers from simply augmenting group sizes cannot be ruled out.
Similar content being viewed by others
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Received: 17 June 1997 / Accepted after revision: 28 February 1998
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wright, J. Helpers-at-the-nest have the same provisioning rule as parents: experimental evidence from play-backs of chick begging. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 42, 423–429 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/s002650050456
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s002650050456