IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v17y2006i1p6-12.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Negotiation over offspring care?--a positive response to partner-provisioning rate in great tits

Author

Listed:
  • C.A. Hinde

Abstract

Game theoretical models of biparental care predict that a change in work rate by one parent should be met by incomplete compensation by its partner. However, in empirical studies on biparental birds, there has been some inconsistency in the direction and extent of the response, and the mechanism behind it has so far been unclear. Parents could be responding directly to partner work rate or indirectly via chick begging. In this study of great tits (Parus major), the work rate of one parent was increased experimentally by augmenting the begging of the chicks with playback of extra begging calls whenever the parent visited the nest. The playback had no effect on the chicks' begging behavior, so any change in the focal parent's behavior was a direct response to its partner's work rate over a short timescale. An experimental increase in care by either male or female parent led to an increase (to a lesser extent) in the work rate of its partner, which is counter to the decrease predicted by partial compensation models. This seemingly paradoxical result may reflect decisions made exclusively over a short timescale and is in keeping with new theoretical work, which takes into account the information content of partner work rates. Copyright 2006.

Suggested Citation

  • C.A. Hinde, 2006. "Negotiation over offspring care?--a positive response to partner-provisioning rate in great tits," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 17(1), pages 6-12, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:17:y:2006:i:1:p:6-12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/ari092
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Samantha C Patrick & Lucy E Browning, 2011. "Exploration Behaviour Is Not Associated with Chick Provisioning in Great Tits," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(10), pages 1-7, October.
    2. Rufus A. Johnstone & Andrea Manica & Annette L. Fayet & Mary Caswell Stoddard & Miguel A. Rodriguez-Gironés & Camilla A. Hinde, 2014. "Reciprocity and conditional cooperation between great tit parents," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 25(1), pages 216-222.
    3. Ariane Mutzel & Anne-Lise Olsen & Kimberley J Mathot & Yimen G Araya-Ajoy & Marion Nicolaus & Jan J Wijmenga & Jonathan Wright & Bart Kempenaers & Niels J Dingemanse, 2019. "Effects of manipulated levels of predation threat on parental provisioning and nestling begging," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 30(4), pages 1123-1135.
    4. Erol Akçay & Joan Roughgarden, 2009. "The Perfect Family: Decision Making in Biparental Care," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(10), pages 1-10, October.
    5. Daiping Wang & Wenyuan Zhang & Shuai Yang & Xiang-Yi Li Richter, 2023. "Sex differences in avian parental care patterns vary across the breeding cycle," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-12, December.
    6. Alfréd Trnka & Tomáš Grim, 2013. "To compensate or not to compensate: testing the negotiation model in the context of nest defense," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 24(1), pages 223-228.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:17:y:2006:i:1:p:6-12. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.