Summary
In many altricial species including the great tit (Parus major) the intensity of brood defense against predators has been shown to increase with the age of the offspring. This effect has been ascribed amongst others to the young becoming more vulnerable as they age (“vulnerability hypothesis”). In a great tit population suffering heavy losses from brood depredation by the great spotted woodpecker (Dendrocopus major), we rendered first and second broods more vulnerable by artificially enlarging the entrance of the nest hole. Contrary to the vulnerability hypothesis, 16 experimental pairs defended their brood against a dummy great spotted woodpecker less vigorously than did 16 control pairs. Nest concealment behavior potentially compromising active defense was minimized by simultaneous playback of nestling distress calls, thus simulating the act of nest predation. This leaves the “brood value hypothesis” as an alternative functional explanation of the defense level — age effect. It predicts that parents should defend their brood in proportion to the “reproductive value” (or some more suitable cohortal equivalent measure) of their offspring. At present, this explanation pertains to one predator species. In first broods, but not in second broods, males defended them more vigorously than did their females. While this parallels previous experiments on brood defense against predators posing a much greater risk to the parents, two functional explanations previously put forward can hardly apply.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Andersson M (1971) Breeding behaviour of the long-tailed skua Stercorarius longicaudus. Ornis Scand 2:35–54
Andersson M, Wiklund CG, Rundgren H (1980) Parental defense of offspring: a model and an example. Anim Behav 28:536–542
Armstrong EA (1954) The ecology of distraction display. Anim Behav 2:121–135
Armstrong EA (1956) Distraction display and the human predator. Ibis 98:641–654
Balen JH van, Franeker JA van, Osieck E (1978) The breeding of great tits in natural sites. Institute of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences. Progress Report 1978:278–279
Barash DP (1975) Evolutionary aspects of parental behavior: distraction behavior of the alpine accentor. Wilson Bull 87:367–373
Berndt R, Winkel W (1967) Die Gelegegrösse des Trauerschnäppers (Ficedula hypoleuca) in Beziehung zu Ort, Zeit und Alter. Vogelwelt 88:97–136
Brunton DH (1990) The effects of nesting stage, sex, and type of predator on parental defense by killdeer (Charadrius vociferus): testing models of avian parental defense. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 26:181–190
Burger J, Gochfeld M, Saliva JE, Gochfeld D, Morales H (1989) Antipredator behaviour in nesting zenaida doves (Zenaida aurita): parental investment or offspring vulnerability. Behaviour 111:129–143
Curio E (1975) The functional organization of antipredator behavior in the pied flycatcher: a study of avian visual perception. Anim Behav 23:1–115
Curio E (1989) Probing into community structure: Behaviour experiments with great tits Parus major. Bird Behav 8:32–37
Curio E, Regelmann K (1982) Fortpflanzungswert und “Brutwert” der Kohlmeise (Parus major). J Ornithol 123:237–257
Curio E, Regelmann K, Zimmermann U (1984) The defense of first and second broods by great tit (Parus major) parents: a test of predictive sociobiology. Z Tierpsychol 66:101–127
Curio E, Regelmann K, Zimmermann U (1985) Brood defense in the great tit (Parus major): the influence of life-history and habitat. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 16:273–283
Fisher J, Hinde RA (1949) The opening of milk bottles by birds. Br Birds 42:347–357
Gibb J (1955) Feeding rates of great tits. Br Birds 48:49–58
Greig-Smith PW (1980) Parental investment in nest defense by stonechats (Saxicola torquata). Anim Behav 28:604–619
Haartman L von (1957) Adaptations in hole-nesting birds. Evolution 11:339–347
Harvey PH, Greenwood PJ (1978) Anti-predator defense strategies: some evolutionary problems. In: Krebs JR, Davies NB (eds) Behavioural ecology: an evolutionary approach. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 129–151
Heinroth O, Heinroth M (1924) Die Vögel Mitteleuropas, vol I. Bermühler, Berlin
Hinde RA (1952) The behaviour of the great tit (Parus major) and some other related species. Behav Suppl 2:1–201
Lemmetyinen R (1971) Nest defense behavior of common and arctic terns and its effects on the success achieved by predators. Ornis Fenn 48:13–24
Löhrl H (1960) Erfahrungen mit Spezialnisthöhlen aus Holzbeton. Aus: Tagungsberichte Nr. 30. Probleme der Angewandten Ornithologie. Deutsche Akademie der Landwirtschaftswissenschaften zu Berlin 1960
Martin TE (1988) On the advantage of being different: nest predation and the coexistence of bird species. Proc Nail Acad Sci 85:2196–2199
Montgomerie RD, Weatherhead PJ (1988) Risks and rewards of nest defense by parent birds. Q Rev Biol 63:167–187
Myrberg AA Jr, Thresher RE (1974) Interspecific aggression and its relevance to the concept of territoriality in reef fishes. Am Zool 14:81–96
Nice MM (1957) Nesting success in altricial birds. Auk 74:305–321
Perrins CM (1965) Population fluctuations and clutch-size in the great tit, Parus major. J Anim Ecol 34:601–647
Redondo T (1989) Avian nest defense: theoretical models and evidence. Behaviour 111:161–195
Redondo T, Arias Reyna L de (1988) Locatability of begging calls in nestling altricial birds. Anim Behav 36:653–661
Redondo T, Carranza J (1989) Offspring reproductive value and nest defense in the magpie (Pica pica). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 25:369–378
Regelmann K, Curio E (1983) Determinants of brood defense in the great tit Parus major. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 13:131–145
Regelmann K, Curio E (1986) Why do great tit (Parus major) males defend their brood more than females do? Anim Behav 34:1206–1214
Ricklefs RE (1969) An analysis of nesting mortality in birds. Smithson Contrib Zool 9:1–48
Rubenstein DI (1982) Reproductive value and behavioral strategies: coming of age in monkeys and horses. In: Bateson PPG, Klopfer PH (eds) Perspectives in ethology, vol 5, Ontogeny. Plenum Press, New York London, pp 469–487
Skutch AF (1949) Do tropical birds rear as many young as they can nourish? Ibis 91:430–455
Skutch AF (1955) The parental stratagems of birds. Ibis 97:118–142
Skutch AF (1976) Parent birds and their young. University of Texas Press, Austin
Vincent TH, Guiguen C (1989) Predation sur des pigeons domestiques Columba livia, par les goelands, Larus argentatus et Larus cachinnans, et consequences eventuelles pour la pathologie humaine. Nos Oiseaux 40:129–140
Weatherhead PJ (1979) Do Savannah sparrows commit the Concorde Fallacy? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 5:373–381
Wiklund CG (1990) Offspring protection by merlin Falco columbarius females; the importance of brood size and expected offspring survival for defense of young. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 26:217–223
Windt W, Curio E (1986) Clutch defense in great tit (Parus major) pairs and the Concorde Fallacy. Ethology 72:236–242
Windt W, Ehrhardt J, Brün J (1990) Do great tit males invest less into their brood if paternity is uncertain? Verh Dtsch Zool Ges 83, Fischer, Stuttgart New York, p 661
Winkel W (1989) Langfristige Bestandsentwicklung von Kohlmeisen (Parus major) und Trauerschnäpper (Ficedula hypoleuca): Ergebnisse aus Niedersachsen. J Ornithol 130:335–343
Zimmermann U, Curio E (1988) Two conflicting needs affecting predator mobbing by great tits (Parus major). Anim Behav 36:926–932
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Onnebrink, H., Curio, E. Brood defense and age of young: a test of the vulnerability hypothesis. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 29, 61–68 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00164296
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00164296