Elsevier

Animal Behaviour

Volume 60, Issue 4, October 2000, Pages 483-493
Animal Behaviour

Regular Article
The effect of social dominance on fattening and food-caching behaviour in Carolina chickadees, Poecile carolinensis

https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2000.1506Get rights and content

Abstract

Subordinates often have to wait for dominants to obtain food. As a result, their foraging success should be less predictable and they should therefore maintain a higher level of energy reserves compared with dominants. A corollary of this prediction is that subordinates should gain mass earlier in the day and maintain higher mass than dominants. We tested these predictions with captive Carolina chickadees. In two different experiments (one where birds were given ad libitum access to food and the other with food access limited to 60 min/day), we formed social flocks of two previously unfamiliar birds and compared their energy management (body fat and food caches) while they were in the flock with energy management when housed alone. Results from both experiments failed to support the predictions. Of all the parameters of body mass and food caching we measured only the following results were significant: (1) On the ad libitum food schedule, both subordinates and dominants accumulated more mass over the day when in a flock compared with when they were solitary, and there were no differences in mass gain between dominants and subordinates. (2) When analysed separately, dominants showed a higher evening mass in the flock compared with the solitary condition, a trend that runs opposite to the prediction. Our results suggest that when in favourable foraging conditions, social interactions might cause dominant and subordinate birds to accumulate more energy reserves as a result of competition. On the other hand, if food supply is limited, both dominants and subordinates may be forced to maintain similar fat reserves as an insurance against increased risk of starvation.

References (44)

  • D.A. Cristol

    Cost of switching social groups for dominants and subordinate dark-eyed juncos (Junco hyemalis)

    Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

    (1995)
  • I.C. Cuthill et al.

    Colour bands, dominance and body mass regulation in male zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata)

    Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B

    (1997)
  • A. Desrochers

    Sex determinantion of black-capped chickadees with a discriminant-analysis

    Journal of Field Ornithology

    (1990)
  • J.B. Ekman et al.

    Monitoring starvation risk: adjustments of body reserves in greenfinches (Carduelis chloris L.) during periods of unpredictable foraging success

    Behavioral Ecology

    (1990)
  • J.B. Ekman et al.

    Using priority to food access: fattening strategies in dominance-structured willow tit (Parus montanus) flocks

    Behavioral Ecology

    (1993)
  • A.G. Gosler

    Environmental and social determinants of winter fat storage in the great tit Parus major

    Journal of Animal Ecology

    (1996)
  • S. Haftorn

    The diurnal body weight cycle in titmice Parus spp

    Ornis Scandinavica

    (1992)
  • M. Hake

    Fattening strategies in dominance-structured greenfinch (Carduelis chloris) flocks in winter

    Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

    (1996)
  • O. Hogstad

    Social organization and dominance behavior in some Parus species

    Wilson Bulletin

    (1989)
  • A.T. Hurly

    Energetic reserves of marsh tits (Parus palustris): food and fat storage in response to variable food supply

    Behavioral Ecology

    (1992)
  • K. Koivula et al.

    Fatness, sex and dominance; seasonal and daily body mass changes in willow tits

    Journal of Avian Biology

    (1995)
  • K. Lahti et al.

    Presence of conspecifics, time of day and age effect willow tit food hoarding

    Animal Behaviour

    (1996)
  • Cited by (42)

    • Behavioural responses of Eastern grey squirrels, Sciurus carolinensis, to cues of risk while foraging

      2015, Behavioural Processes
      Citation Excerpt :

      Previous studies demonstrate that while there are benefits to social foraging (reviewed in Galef and Giraldeau, 2001), for an asocial species like the grey squirrel (Koprowski, 1996) there are a number of costs associated with foraging nearby either conspecifics or heterospecifics who use the same resources. The increased competition for resources fosters a need to spend more time foraging (Pravosudov and Lucas, 2000), and the potential for agonistic encounters encourages more vigilance behaviour (Tarigan 1994), but is performed at a cost to foraging (Makowska and Kramer, 2007; Shonfield, 2011). Our study clarifies how grey squirrels respond to potential sources of competition while foraging in comparison to non-competitor species.

    • Adaptive management of body mass by Siberian jays

      2013, Animal Behaviour
      Citation Excerpt :

      It is therefore unsurprising that offspring were larger than immigrants in our study. The other species lacking the predicted relationship between dominance and body mass are also species that hoard food (Pravosudov & Lucas 2000; Polo & Bautista 2002). Such species have been predicted to increase their hoard size instead of body mass in response to increased uncertainty.

    • Behavioural profile predicts dominance status in mountain chickadees, Poecile gambeli

      2009, Animal Behaviour
      Citation Excerpt :

      We determined dominance rank by recording typical dominance interactions including aggressive interactions (the dominant bird attacked the subordinate while the subordinate bird offered no resistance) and passive displacements (the subordinate bird always gives way to the dominant bird; Lahti 1998; Pravosudov & Lucas 2000; Pravosudov et al. 2003). We always observed birds for at least 5 min (allowing for multiple interactions) before ending the dominance test, although dominance in pairs of male mountain chickadees is generally apparent after a single interaction, and reversals have not been observed following multiple interactions (Pravosudov & Lucas 2000; Pravosudov et al. 2003). In chickadees, dominance hierarchies are strictly linear without reversals, and the relationship between any two given birds reflects their dominance relationship within a social group (Ekman 1989; Hogstad 1989; Lahti 1998; Pravosudov & Lucas 2000; Ratcliffe et al. 2007).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    f1

    Correspondence and present address: V. Pravosudov, Section of Neurobiology, Physiology and Behavior, University of California Davis, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616-8519, U.S.A. (email:[email protected]).

    f2

    J. R. Lucas is at the Department of Biological Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907-1392.

    View full text