Male Northern Orioles Eject Cowbird Eggs: Implications for the Evolution of Rejection Behavior

Sealy, Spencer G.; Neudorf, Diane L. H.

doi:10.2307/1369023

Cited by 54 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The eggs of most species examined differed from cowbird eggs in terms of the UV reflectance of the cap or side, which provides a potential cue or signal for use in egg recognition. Although the eggs of the five rejecter species showed somewhat different levels of UV reflectance, these differences are not likely related to differences in rejection frequency because these species reject 96-100% of cowbird eggs (Rothstein 1975;Sealy and Bazin 1995;Sealy and Neudorf 1995;Sealy 1996;Lorenzana and Sealy 2001). Interestingly, yellow warbler was the only species …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…American robin (n = 31) Rothstein (1975) Gray catbird (n = 31) Rothstein (1975), Lorenzana and Sealy (2001) Baltimore oriole (n = 30) Sealy and Neudorf (1995) Accepters Least flycatcher (n = 27) Briskie and Sealy (1987) Red-eyed vireo (n = 7) Rothstein (1975) Yellow warbler (n = 30) Rothstein (1975), Sealy (1995) Song sparrow (n = 32) Rothstein (1975) Red-winged blackbird (n = 37) Rothstein (1975) Orchard oriole (n = 19) Sealy and Underwood (2004) a Scientific names not mentioned in the text: eastern kingbird (Tyrannus tyrannus), warbling vireo (V. gilvus), Baltimore oriole (I. galbula). Sample size is the number of host clutches on which reflectance measurements were taken b References indicate experimental studies that documented each species' status as a rejecter or accepter of cowbird eggs mean UV reflectance values for the eight side measurements and the three cap measurements, respectively.…”

Section: Rejectersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

UV reflectance of eggs of brown-headed cowbirds (Molothrus ater) and accepter and rejecter hosts

Underwood

Sealy

2008

J Ornithol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many hosts of obligate brood parasites accept parasitic eggs despite the high costs of parasitism. Acceptance is particularly perplexing in brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater) (hereafter ''cowbird'') hosts because the eggs of cowbirds and most hosts do not appear to match closely in visual characteristics detectable by humans. However, recent evidence suggests that parasite and host eggs may match in their ultraviolet (UV) reflectance, undetectable by humans, and that birds may use UV signals for egg discrimination. We determined whether egg colour matching in UV reflectance separates accepters and rejecters of cowbird parasitism by comparing the total UV (300-400 nm) reflectance of the eggs of 11 host species to cowbird eggs. Eggs of three of five accepter species and five of five rejecter species differed significantly from cowbird eggs in UV reflectance. We found no significant difference in the UV reflectance of the eggs of three closely related pairs of accepter and rejecter species. There also was no significant difference in the UV reflectance of cowbird eggs laid in nests of five host species, and the UV reflectance of cowbird eggs was not significantly correlated with that of host clutches. Thus, we found no support for the UV-matching hypothesis in brown-headed cowbirds and UV reflectance does not appear to separate accepters and rejecters of parasitism. Differences in UV reflectance between cowbird and host eggs, however, provide potential cues for use in egg discrimination. Experimental testing is needed to determine the relative importance of UV reflectance compared to other visual cues.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Rejectersmentioning

confidence: 99%

UV reflectance of eggs of brown-headed cowbirds (Molothrus ater) and accepter and rejecter hosts

Underwood

Sealy

2008

J Ornithol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Only a few studies focussed on host behaviour immediately following parasitism, mainly in the hosts of the brown-headed cowbird (Sealy and Neudorf 1995;Sealy and Bazin 1995) and the hosts of the common cuckoo . Soler et al (2002) filmed three species after parasitism with an experimental egg, and revealed sex differences in egg recognition: where both sexes incubated eggs, both females and males ejected parasitic eggs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Egg rejection behaviour in the great reed warbler (Acrocephalus arundinaceus): the effect of egg type

Honza

Moskát

2008

J Ethol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Egg discrimination in hosts of the common cuckoo Cuculus canorus is frequently studied by experimental parasitism, using model cuckoo eggs. We compared egg rejection behaviour of the great reed warbler Acrocephalus arundinaceus to either model cuckoo eggs made of plastic or painted real host eggs. We simultaneously parasitised host nests by two different egg types to simulate cuckoo parasitism. A previous study revealed very similar, ca. 70%, rejection rates against both of these egg types (beige or bluish background colour maculated with dark brown) when they were used for single parasitism. In the present study we showed 96% average rejection rates against these egg types when they were applied in multiple experimental parasitism, causing a more predictable output for rejection behaviour. Hard plastic eggs and painted real eggs were rejected at similar frequencies, and videotaping revealed that model egg rejection caused extra work for great reed warblers. We revealed a new type of rejection behaviour, when hosts tried to eject hard-shelled model cuckoo eggs: Hosts made little holes in the middle part of these plastic eggs by pecking them several times before ejection, as if seeking the possibility to pierce and hold these eggs in their bills. Painted real eggs were rejected by actually puncturing the eggshell and holding them in the bill during ejection. No instances of grasp ejection were recorded during filming. Most experimental eggs of either type were ejected within 1 day after the introduction of the eggs, indicating that hosts made their rejection decisions quickly. Our observations suggest the lack of plasticity in the mode and timing of ejection behaviour towards experimental cuckoo eggs of different types in great reed warblers.

show abstract

“…The sight of a brood parasite, for example, may put hosts on alert and lead to increased nest attendance (Davies et al 2003), which may, in turn, significantly promote the probability of egg rejection (Moksnes et al 2000;Bártol et al 2002). Checking the nest contents by parents may facilitate spotting of damaged eggs, rapid removal of which has been shown to be highly adaptive for survival chances of the remaining clutch (Sealy and Neudorf 1995). Moreover, only recently, M. Honza et al (in preparation) found that a high proportion of time spent nest checking significantly accelerates the ejection of a parasitic egg.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adjustment of incubation according to the threat posed: a further signal of enemy recognition in the Blackcap Sylvia atricapilla?

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nest predation and brood parasitism are costly for nest owners, and natural selection should therefore favour the evolution of parental counterdefences. We addressed the question of whether Blackcaps Sylvia atricapilla change their incubation behaviour in response to various nest intruders and whether this adjustment matches the intensity of mobbing exhibited towards these intruders. Near focal nests, we successively exposed a dummy of a brood parasite, nest predator and an innocuous species. After the parents had responded, we removed the dummy and filmed their incubation. The most aggressive response towards the Common Cuckoo Cuculus canorus and high nest attendance after its disappearance indicated recognition of the brood parasite. Low-intensity response to the Jay Garrulus glandarius, together with reduced subsequent parental care, suggested that Blackcaps perceived it either as less deleterious at the egg stage than the Cuckoo or as a danger to themselves. Almost no aggression towards the Turtle Dove Streptopelia turtur, along with the resumption of incubation after its removal, implied that Blackcaps recognised it as harmless. In addition, we found that the level of aggression positively correlated with nest attendance, suggesting a link between the intensity of mobbing and subsequent parental care. Altogether, our results demonstrate that the issue of enemy recognition may be viewed as a complex of both aggressive and postpresentation behaviours.

show abstract

Male Northern Orioles Eject Cowbird Eggs: Implications for the Evolution of Rejection Behavior

Cited by 54 publications

References 24 publications

UV reflectance of eggs of brown-headed cowbirds (Molothrus ater) and accepter and rejecter hosts

UV reflectance of eggs of brown-headed cowbirds (Molothrus ater) and accepter and rejecter hosts

Egg rejection behaviour in the great reed warbler (Acrocephalus arundinaceus): the effect of egg type

Adjustment of incubation according to the threat posed: a further signal of enemy recognition in the Blackcap Sylvia atricapilla?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About