House sparrows selectively eject parasitic conspecific eggs and incur very low rejection costs

Soler, Manuel; Ruiz‐Castellano, Cristina; Fernández-Pinos, María del Carmen; Rösler, Anja; Ontanilla, Juan; Pérez‐Contreras, Tomás

doi:10.1007/s00265-011-1209-z

Cited by 25 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Various materials for nest construction (cotton, wood, mattress stuffing and vegetable material) were provided with ad libitum access during the breeding season. More detailed information on aviaries and sparrow care can be found in Soler et al [38].…”

Section: Materials and Methods (A) Study Species Study Population Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Do first-time breeding females imprint on their own eggs?

et al. 2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The egg-recognition processes underlying egg rejection are assumed to be based on an imprinting-like process (a female learning the aspect of her own eggs during her first breeding attempt). The imprinting-like process and the misimprinting costs have been the objective of many theoretical models and frequently have a leading role in papers published on brood parasitism; however, an experiment has never been undertaken to test the existence of this imprinting-like process by manipulating egg appearance in first-time breeding females. Here, we present the first such experimental study using the house sparrow (Passer domesticus), which is a conspecific brood parasite and which has a good ability to reject conspecific eggs, as a model species. We found that contrary to what the hypothesis predicts first-time breeding females did not reject their own eggs in their second breeding attempt. This lack of response against unmanipulated eggs could indicate that females have an innate preference for their own eggs. However, in a second experimental group in which first-time breeding females were allowed to learn the aspect of their (unmanipulated) own eggs, none ejected manipulated eggs during their second clutch either-a finding that does not support the idea of recognition templates being inherited, but instead suggests that recognition templates could be acquired again at each new breeding attempt. Our results demonstrate that it is likely that egg discrimination is not influenced by egg appearance in the first breeding attempt.

show abstract

Section: Materials and Methods (A) Study Species Study Population Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In our sparrow population, most pairs lay more than one clutch [38]. Thus, we designed an experiment involving first-time breeding females, considering first and second clutches and three experimental groups (table 1).…”

Section: (B) Experimental Design Predictions and Egg Manipulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do first-time breeding females imprint on their own eggs?

et al. 2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For house sparrows in Europe, although rejection of conspecific eggs was reported (Lopez de Hierro and Moreno-Rueda 2010; Soler et al 2011; but see Yang et al 2015aYang et al , 2016b, Manna et al (2017) Cross-fostering experiments indicated that Russet Sparrows have chick recognition abilities. According to our results, newly hatched alien chicks, which cannot produce begging calls yet, were ejected or starved to dead in sparrow nests, which implied that Russet Sparrow can identify alien chicks by visual cues.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Russet Sparrows spot alien chicks from their nests

Huo

Yang

et al. 2018

Avian Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:In coevolutionary interactions between brood parasites and their hosts, host parents are under strong selection to evolve defenses against parasitism. Egg rejection is an efficient and common defense against parasitism, although some apparently suitable hosts do not reject cuckoo eggs.Methods: Sparrows Ploceidae are widespread throughout the Old World, and they have a suitable diet for rearing cuckoos, but still they are rarely exploited by brood parasites. To solve such puzzle, we conducted artificial parasitism and cross-fostering experiments in Russet Sparrow (Passer cinnamomeus). Results:The present study showed that Russet Sparrows have no egg recognition ability, but recognize their own nestlings and eject alien chicks or starve them to death. They may use visual cues in chick recognition, although they accept sister species Tree Sparrow (Passer montanus). Conclusions:By rejecting nestlings of foreign species, Russet Sparrows have succeeded to escape from the brood parasitism by cuckoos and other parasites. Our studies shed light on the puzzle why some species are not utilized by cuckoo parasites as hosts.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Furthermore, as we explained [1], we severely underestimated parasitism rates in our study populations. Moreover, high current parasitism rates are not critical to provide support for CBP hypothesis; previously [11] supported CBP scenario based on current CBP rates of 2.7% in their study population of house sparrows (Passer domesticus).Studies of IBP hosts routinely interpret high rejection of foreign eggs in the absence of current IBP as an evidence of historical IBP. We do not see any empirical or theoretical arguments that would prevent us from applying the identical logic to CBP systems.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The evolutionary causes of egg rejection in European thrushes (Turdusspp.): a reply to M. Soler

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

CorrespondenceA response to: Soler: No evidence of conspecific brood parasitism provoking egg rejection in thrushes. Frontiers in Zoology 2014, 11:68. Several species of European thrushes (genus Turdus) reject foreign eggs, yet the evolutionary causes of this behavior remained unclear. Recently, we concluded that conspecific (CBP), rather than interspecific brood parasitism (IBP) is responsible for the patterns of foreign egg rejection in these taxa [1]. In his comment M. Soler does not agree with this conclusion. Here we address each of his four main points to demonstrate the principles that (i) a theory is never out of date but is either supported or discredited, and (ii) it is not the use of references, but instead the collection and analysis of new data, which advances scientific progress.First, Soler argues that the costs of CPB are too low to select for the evolution of host defenses and that the foreign eggs are too similar to host eggs for effective discrimination. That costs of CPB seem to be generally low across various species does not necessarily mean that such costs are always low (see also p. 51 in [2]). For example, IBP is generally highly costly to hosts but in several hosts of the brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater), there is little or no detectable cost of IBP [3]. Regarding egg similarity, inter-clutch variation in both Turdus species that we studied is sufficiently high to allow for foreign conspecific egg discrimination both in theory [4] and in reality [1].Second, Soler takes issue with the maintenance versus decay of egg rejection behaviors as an antiparasitic host defense in the absence of ongoing brood parasitism. Crucially, the empirical studies referenced by Soler reported that the rejection costs associated with the ejection of foreign eggs were essentially nil. In contrast, we documented non-negligible rejection errors and costs, even in response to foreign conspecific eggs. Therefore our study system does not fit the critical assumption of Soler's argument which holds only for "a trait which does not decrease individual fitness".Third, Soler argues that aggression towards cuckoo dummies combined with the foster parents' reluctance to feed cuckoo nestlings are a clear indication of past evolutionary exposure to IBP. This argument is flawed (see [5]). Song thrush (Turdus philomelos) show very low and nonspecific aggression towards cuckoo dummies and cuckoo chicks in experimental nests die not because of host chick discrimination but because the smooth nest-cup design prevents successful eviction of host nestmates by the hatchling cuckoo, forcing it into fatal competition with host chicks. In turn, blackbirds (T. merula) are aggressive not only to cuckoo dummies but to any intruders near their nests, including harmless pigeons (Columba livia), indicating that their aggression did not specifically evolve in response to IBP [6]. Cuckoo chicks cross-fostered to blackbird nests also do not survive to fledging but not because blackbirds were reluctant to feed cuckoo chicks, as the paras...

show abstract

House sparrows selectively eject parasitic conspecific eggs and incur very low rejection costs

Cited by 25 publications

References 66 publications

Do first-time breeding females imprint on their own eggs?

Do first-time breeding females imprint on their own eggs?

Russet Sparrows spot alien chicks from their nests

The evolutionary causes of egg rejection in European thrushes (Turdusspp.): a reply to M. Soler

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About