Fitness benefits to intrasexual aggression in female house wrens, Troglodytes aedon

Krieg, Cara A.; Getty, Thomas

doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2019.12.001

Cited by 10 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 65 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Females may perceive interactions between a neighboring male and fertile female as a threat to her own nest site and reproductive investment (Dabelsteen et al., 2007). In house wrens, intraspecific competition among males and females for mates and nest sites is common (Belles‐Isles & Picman, 1986; Krieg & Getty, 2020). Following a successful territorial takeover, new males often destroy the eggs of the previous territory holder (Johnson & Kermott, 1989).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anthropogenic noise affects female, not male house wren response to change in signaling network

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vocal signals mediate social relationships, and among networks of territorial animals, information is often shared via broadcast vocalizations. Anthropogenic noise may disrupt communication among individuals within networks, as animals change the way they vocalize in noise. Furthermore, constraints on signal transmission, including frequency masking and distance, may affect information exchange following a disruption in social networks. We tested the hypothesis that signaling interactions within networks of breeding male and female house wrens (Troglodytes aedon) depend on distance, ambient noise, and receiver nesting stage. We used playback experiments to simulate territorial intrusions with and without noise playbacks on the territories of established males and simultaneously recorded the vocal responses of neighbors. To examine whether intrusions impacted interactions between males, we used randomization tests to determine whether treatment, distance, noise, or nesting stage affected vocal coordination between challenged and neighboring males. We also quantified singing patterns to explore whether intrusions on territories of challenged males affected singing by males and females on neighboring territories. Males sang at the lowest rates and were less likely to overlap songs with the challenged male when their partner was laying, compared to males during early and late nesting stages. Noise and distance did not affect vocal coordination or male singing rates. Fewer females sang during the intruder-only treatment compared to the control and intrusions with noise. Added noise in the territories of challenged males may have masked signals, and as a result, females only changed their behavior during the intruder-only treatment. Our results suggest that the fertility of breeding partners may be more important to males than short-term changes on rival male territories. Elevated noise did little to alter male responses to threats within networks. Females appeared to eavesdrop on interactions involving neighboring males, but noise may have prevented detection of their interactions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anthropogenic noise affects female, not male house wren response to change in signaling network

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this comparative analysis, we propose and test a solution to this problem by evaluating the hypothesis that obligate secondary cavity nesting enhances territorial aggression and circulating testosterone levels in both sexes. This hypothesis was previously untested across species, though it lies at the core of species-specific studies on the adaptive value of competition for nesting cavities in birds (Duckworth, 2008; Gustafsson, 1988; Krieg and Getty, 2020; Leffelaar and Robertson, 1985; Rosvall, 2008). It also dovetails with evidence across other vertebrate taxa suggesting that females as well as males compete for limited breeding resources (Brandtmann et al, 1999; Hare and Simmons, 2019; Reedy et al, 2017; Stockley and Bro-Jørgensen, 2011; While et al, 2009; Wu et al, 2018), and that androgens may be involved (Cox et al, 2015; Davies et al, 2016; Desjardins et al, 2006; Woodley and Moore, 1999).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the Turdidae and Hirundinidae families, obligate secondary cavity-nesting species spent more of the simulated territorial intrusion physically attacking a conspecific mount compared to their relatives that have less restrictive nesting strategies. Past work on one or another obligate cavity nesting bird species found that aggression is beneficial for obtaining and maintaining a nesting territory (Duckworth and Badyaev, 2007; Krieg and Getty, 2020; Rosvall, 2008; Sandell and Smith, 1997; Szász et al, 2019). Our study finds that this adaptive behavioral trait is enhanced in species that compete for cavities, suggesting that nesting strategy is a potentially unifying driver of competitive phenotypes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, male territorial defense facilitates access to mates and mate guarding (Harts et al, 2016), and these factors should apply comparably to the 4 species in our study, all of which form socially monogamous pairs. In cavity-nesting females, aggression may also serve a number of functions, including securing exclusive access to mates (Sandell, 1998; Slagsvold et al, 1999, 1993), defense from conspecific brood parasitism (Gowaty and Wagner, 1988), ovicide avoidance (Krieg and Getty, 2020), and anti-predator defense (Winkler, 1992). Our comparative case study demonstrates that cavity-nesting rises above these potentially sex- and species-specific factors as an especially salient predictor of variation in aggression.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The alternative hypothesis, that female-female competition directly shapes the evolution of competitive traits in females, has since received abundant evidence (Clutton-Brock, 2009; Hare and Simmons, 2019). Across the tree of life, females engage in social competition and receive fitness benefits (Boersma et al, 2020; Bro-Jørgensen, 2002; Krieg and Getty, 2020; Rosvall, 2011, 2008; Sandell, 1998; Slagsvold and Lifjeld, 1994; Stockley and Bro-Jørgensen, 2011; Wu et al, 2018). It is no longer in question that intrasexual competition among females is adaptive.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Nesting strategy shapes territorial aggression but not testosterone: a comparative approach in female and male birds

Lipshutz

Rosvall

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our understanding of the proximate and ultimate mechanisms shaping competitive phenotypes primarily stems from research on male-male competition for mates, even though female-female competition is also widespread. Obligate secondary cavity-nesting has evolved repeatedly across avian lineages, providing a useful comparative context to explore how competition over limited nest cavities shapes aggression and its underlying mechanisms across species. Although evidence from one or another cavity-nesting species suggests that territorial aggression is adaptive in both females and males, this has not yet been tested in a comparative framework. We tested the hypothesis that cavity-nesting generates more robust territorial aggression, in comparison to close relatives with less restrictive nesting strategies. Our focal species were two obligate secondary cavity-nesting species and two related species with more flexible nesting strategies in the same avian family: tree swallow (Tachycineta bicolor) vs. barn swallow (Hirundo rustica); Eastern bluebird (Sialia sialis) vs. American robin (Turdus migratorius). We assayed conspecific territorial aggression, and found that cavity-nesting species physically attacked a simulated intruder more often than their close relatives. This pattern held for both females and males. Because territorial aggression is often associated with elevated testosterone, we also hypothesized that cavity-nesting species would exhibit higher testosterone levels in circulation. However, cavity-nesting species did not have higher testosterone in circulation for either sex, despite some correlative evidence that testosterone is associated with higher rates of physical attack in female tree swallows. Our focus on a competitive context that is relevant to both sexes – competition over essential breeding resources – provides a useful comparative framework for co-consideration of proximate and ultimate drivers of reproductive competition in females and males.

show abstract

Exploration behavior differs between Darwin’s finch species and predicts territory defense and hatching success

Katsis,

Colombelli-Négrel,

Akçay

et al. 2024

Behav Ecol Sociobiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Darwin’s finch species in the Galápagos Islands are famously distinguished by their morphology but less attention has been given to behavioral differences between species. In this study, we compared behavior between four Darwin’s finch species on Floreana Island: small ground finch (Geospiza fuliginosa), medium ground finch (G. fortis), small tree finch (Camarhynchus parvulus), and medium tree finch (C. pauper). After capturing birds using mist-nets, we measured three behavioral traits: (1) boldness during human handling, (2) exploration in a novel environment, and (3) aggressiveness towards their mirror image. First, we found that ground finches were bolder and more exploratory than tree finches, consistent with their distinct ecological niches on Floreana Island and with the theoretical prediction that diet generalists should be less wary of novelty. Second, we tested the ecological validity of these behavioral variables at the individual level by relating them to territory defense behavior and breeding success. We found that males that were more exploratory in the novel environment also reacted more aggressively to a simulated territory intruder and showed lower offspring hatching success during the breeding season. Hence, our findings support previous work showing behavioral differences between Darwin’s finch species and also suggest pathways by which behavioral differences among individuals might influence fitness. Significance statement Closely-related species that overlap in their geographical range may differ in their morphology and/or behavior, allowing them to occupy different ecological niches. In this study, we explored behavioral differences between four Darwin’s finch species on Floreana Island in the Galápagos Archipelago. We found clear interspecies differences in behavior, with the ground finches struggling more often during handling (boldness) and visiting more sectors in a novel environment (exploration) compared to the tree finches. After birds were released, we continued to observe a subset of male finches in the wild. An individual’s exploration behavior significantly predicted both its aggressive response to a territory intruder (simulated using song playback) and offspring hatching success during the breeding season. This suggests that individual differences in exploration behavior can potentially be used as a proxy for territorial behavior in the wild and may also predict fitness outcomes.

show abstract

Fitness benefits to intrasexual aggression in female house wrens, Troglodytes aedon

Cited by 10 publications

References 65 publications

Anthropogenic noise affects female, not male house wren response to change in signaling network

Anthropogenic noise affects female, not male house wren response to change in signaling network

Nesting strategy shapes territorial aggression but not testosterone: a comparative approach in female and male birds

Exploration behavior differs between Darwin’s finch species and predicts territory defense and hatching success

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About