Skip to main content
Log in

Brood defense and age of young: a test of the vulnerability hypothesis

  • Published:
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andersson M (1971) Breeding behaviour of the long-tailed skua Stercorarius longicaudus. Ornis Scand 2:35–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersson M, Wiklund CG, Rundgren H (1980) Parental defense of offspring: a model and an example. Anim Behav 28:536–542

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong EA (1954) The ecology of distraction display. Anim Behav 2:121–135

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong EA (1956) Distraction display and the human predator. Ibis 98:641–654

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Barash DP (1975) Evolutionary aspects of parental behavior: distraction behavior of the alpine accentor. Wilson Bull 87:367–373

    Google Scholar 

  • Berndt R, Winkel W (1967) Die Gelegegrösse des Trauerschnäppers (Ficedula hypoleuca) in Beziehung zu Ort, Zeit und Alter. Vogelwelt 88:97–136

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Curio E (1975) The functional organization of antipredator behavior in the pied flycatcher: a study of avian visual perception. Anim Behav 23:1–115

    Google Scholar 

  • Curio E (1989) Probing into community structure: Behaviour experiments with great tits Parus major. Bird Behav 8:32–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Curio E, Regelmann K (1982) Fortpflanzungswert und “Brutwert” der Kohlmeise (Parus major). J Ornithol 123:237–257

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher J, Hinde RA (1949) The opening of milk bottles by birds. Br Birds 42:347–357

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibb J (1955) Feeding rates of great tits. Br Birds 48:49–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Greig-Smith PW (1980) Parental investment in nest defense by stonechats (Saxicola torquata). Anim Behav 28:604–619

    Google Scholar 

  • Haartman L von (1957) Adaptations in hole-nesting birds. Evolution 11:339–347

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinroth O, Heinroth M (1924) Die Vögel Mitteleuropas, vol I. Bermühler, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinde RA (1952) The behaviour of the great tit (Parus major) and some other related species. Behav Suppl 2:1–201

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Montgomerie RD, Weatherhead PJ (1988) Risks and rewards of nest defense by parent birds. Q Rev Biol 63:167–187

    Google Scholar 

  • Myrberg AA Jr, Thresher RE (1974) Interspecific aggression and its relevance to the concept of territoriality in reef fishes. Am Zool 14:81–96

    Google Scholar 

  • Nice MM (1957) Nesting success in altricial birds. Auk 74:305–321

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrins CM (1965) Population fluctuations and clutch-size in the great tit, Parus major. J Anim Ecol 34:601–647

    Google Scholar 

  • Redondo T (1989) Avian nest defense: theoretical models and evidence. Behaviour 111:161–195

    Google Scholar 

  • Redondo T, Arias Reyna L de (1988) Locatability of begging calls in nestling altricial birds. Anim Behav 36:653–661

    Google Scholar 

  • Redondo T, Carranza J (1989) Offspring reproductive value and nest defense in the magpie (Pica pica). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 25:369–378

    Google Scholar 

  • Regelmann K, Curio E (1983) Determinants of brood defense in the great tit Parus major. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 13:131–145

    Google Scholar 

  • Regelmann K, Curio E (1986) Why do great tit (Parus major) males defend their brood more than females do? Anim Behav 34:1206–1214

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricklefs RE (1969) An analysis of nesting mortality in birds. Smithson Contrib Zool 9:1–48

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Skutch AF (1949) Do tropical birds rear as many young as they can nourish? Ibis 91:430–455

    Google Scholar 

  • Skutch AF (1955) The parental stratagems of birds. Ibis 97:118–142

    Google Scholar 

  • Skutch AF (1976) Parent birds and their young. University of Texas Press, Austin

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Weatherhead PJ (1979) Do Savannah sparrows commit the Concorde Fallacy? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 5:373–381

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Windt W, Curio E (1986) Clutch defense in great tit (Parus major) pairs and the Concorde Fallacy. Ethology 72:236–242

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Winkel W (1989) Langfristige Bestandsentwicklung von Kohlmeisen (Parus major) und Trauerschnäpper (Ficedula hypoleuca): Ergebnisse aus Niedersachsen. J Ornithol 130:335–343

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmermann U, Curio E (1988) Two conflicting needs affecting predator mobbing by great tits (Parus major). Anim Behav 36:926–932

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints 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

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00164296

Keywords

Navigation