Is tail wagging in white wagtails, Motacilla alba, an honest signal of vigilance?

Randler, Christoph

doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.07.026

Cited by 23 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Pursuit-deterrent signals, which usually consist of auditory and/or visual signals, have been studied in birds (Alvarez 1993;Clark 2005;Murphy 2006;Randler 2006Randler , 2007, mammals (Caro et al 2004), and fish (Godin and Davis 1995). For example, stotting in gazelles is interpreted as a signal that reduces the probability of being attacked by predators (Caro 1986).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex differences in antipredator tail-waving displays of the diurnal yellow-headed gecko Gonatodes albogularis from tropical forests of Colombia

Alonso

Cotrina

Pardo

et al. 2009

J Ethol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many vertebrate species show display behaviors when predators are in their vicinity. Some of these displays may inform the predator of the improbability of capturing the prey (i.e., pursuit-deterrent displays) and are potentially advantageous to both predator and prey. Here we present data on a tail display performed by Gonatodes albogularis, a diurnal tropical gecko. We performed transect surveys in three habitats near Bogotá in Colombia. Geckos detected during transects were approached by the observer in a standardized way, and details of their tailwaving displays were recorded. In control recordings animals were watched from a distant site without approaching them. Results showed sexual differences in tail-waving display: when approached by the observer, males performed this behavior more frequently than females. We found no significant differences between males and females in flight-initiation distances and height above the substratum when they were initially located. Results also showed that males displayed more frequently when approached than when the simulated predator remained stationary. We interpret these results as evidence that the display functions as a pursuit-deterrent signal to potential predators. However, as some tail displays were performed in the presence of conspecifics, the display may also have a social function.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex differences in antipredator tail-waving displays of the diurnal yellow-headed gecko Gonatodes albogularis from tropical forests of Colombia

Alonso

Cotrina

Pardo

et al. 2009

J Ethol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This pattern suggests that tail-flagging deters snakes from striking because tail-flags honestly advertise squirrel vigilance and readiness to avoid attacks. Although vigilance advertisement has been suggested as a mechanism by which prey signalling might deter predators [12,13], our study is the first to demonstrate that a vigilance advertisement signal actually deters attack from a free-ranging predator. Most studies of predator-deterrent signals involving displays towards ambush predators focus on predator detection signals, whereby the prey signal notifies the predator it has been detected.…”

Section: Discussion (A) Strike Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…However, several researchers have noted that many putative predator-deterrent signals are also frequently given in the absence of predators [11 -15] Although exhibiting conspicuous signals in the absence of a receiver may seem maladaptive, several plausible explanations for this pattern have been offered, including (i) dishonest predator detection [11]; (ii) deflecting attacks of undetected predators to non-vital body parts, such as a tail [14,15]; or (iii) deterring attacks from undetected predators by honestly advertising vigilance [12,13]. In the last case, predators are thought to be less likely to attack signallers because predators would only be willing to forgo crypsis if such an attack had a high probability of success.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ground squirrel tail-flag displays alter both predatory strike and ambush site selection behaviours of rattlesnakes

Barbour

Clark

2012

Proc. R. Soc. B.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many species approach, inspect and signal towards their predators. These behaviours are often interpreted as predator-deterrent signals-honest signals that indicate to a predator that continued hunting is likely to be futile. However, many of these putative predator-deterrent signals are given when no predator is present, and it remains unclear if and why such signals deter predators. We examined the effects of one such signal, the tail-flag display of California ground squirrels, which is frequently given both during and outside direct encounters with northern Pacific rattlesnakes. We video-recorded and quantified the ambush foraging responses of rattlesnakes to tail-flagging displays from ground squirrels. We found that tail-flagging deterred snakes from striking squirrels, most likely by advertising squirrel vigilance (i.e. readiness to dodge a snake strike). We also found that tail-flagging by adult squirrels increased the likelihood that snakes would leave their ambush site, apparently by elevating the vigilance of nearby squirrels which reduces the profitability of the ambush site. Our results provide some of the first empirical evidence of the mechanisms by which a prey display, although frequently given in the absence of a predator, may still deter predators during encounters.

show abstract

“…Foraging‐enhancement hypothesis Tail pumping by Eastern Phoebes in our study did not appear to aid in foraging. Similarly, Randler (2006) studied the tail‐wagging behavior of White Wagtails ( Motacilla alba ) and concluded that prey flushing was an unlikely function of such behavior. Because White Wagtails tail‐wagged regularly when preening and clearly not searching for prey, and there was a negative correlation between tail wagging and pecking rates, Randler (2006) concluded that tail wagging by wagtails did not cause potential prey to flush.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Murphy (2006) suggested the wag‐display functions as a perception advertisement that communicates a motmot's awareness of a predator, and that motmots may direct the display at ambush predators such as bird hawks, foxes, and cats. Randler (2006) reported that tail wagging by White Wagtails ( Motacilla alba ) also appeared to serve as a pursuit‐deterrent signal directed toward ambush predators. Tail wagging and scanning for predators were positively correlated when wagtails were feeding and preening, suggesting that tail wagging serves as an honest signal of vigilance (Randler 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Tail pumping by Eastern Phoebes: an honest, persistent predator-deterrent signal?

Carder

Ritchison

2009

Journal of Field Ornithology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Eastern Phoebes (Sayornis phoebe) persistently pump their tails when perched, and the function of this behavior is unclear. We tested four hypotheses concerning the possible functions of tail pumping, including the (1) balance hypothesis, (2) signal‐aggression‐to‐conspecifics hypothesis, (3) foraging‐enhancement hypothesis, and (4) predator‐deterrent hypothesis. Eastern Phoebes were monitored from 1 April to 1 August 2006 and 1 June to 1 August 2007 in Madison County, Kentucky. Phoebes were captured in mist nets and marked with unique combinations of colored‐leg bands. Each focal phoebe was observed one to two times a week and tail‐pumping rates, wind velocity, and perch characteristics were recorded. Our results provided support only for the predator‐deterrent hypothesis. Phoebes exhibited a significant increase in tail‐pumping rates in the presence of a potential predator (Eastern Screech‐Owl, Megascops asio), suggesting that tail pumping, along with increased rates of calling, informs potential predators that a phoebe is aware of their presence and, therefore, more difficult to capture. Phoebes, however, tail pump regardless of whether a predator has been sighted and such movement could make phoebes easier to detect. If so, and if a detected phoebe provides no additional cues (calling) to indicate awareness of a predator, an attack might actually be more likely. However, tail pumping may be beneficial, regardless of whether a predator has been detected, if it serves as a continuous, honest predator‐deterrent signal. This would be the case if predators learned to associate tail pumping and phoebes, and also learned that phoebes, with their alert posture, small size, and impressive aerial maneuvering abilities, represent low reward, difficult‐to‐capture prey. If so, then both phoebes and predators would benefit, with phoebes less likely to be attacked and predators not initiating attacks that would waste time and energy and alert other potential prey to their presence.

show abstract

Is tail wagging in white wagtails, Motacilla alba, an honest signal of vigilance?

Cited by 23 publications

References 35 publications

Sex differences in antipredator tail-waving displays of the diurnal yellow-headed gecko Gonatodes albogularis from tropical forests of Colombia

Sex differences in antipredator tail-waving displays of the diurnal yellow-headed gecko Gonatodes albogularis from tropical forests of Colombia

Ground squirrel tail-flag displays alter both predatory strike and ambush site selection behaviours of rattlesnakes

Tail pumping by Eastern Phoebes: an honest, persistent predator-deterrent signal?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About