IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v20y2009i5p978-984.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Flexible cuckoo chick-rejection rules in the superb fairy-wren

Author

Listed:
  • Naomi E. Langmore
  • Andrew Cockburn
  • Andrew F. Russell
  • Rebecca M. Kilner

Abstract

Recognition of brood parasitic cuckoo nestlings poses a challenge to hosts because cues expressed by cuckoos and host young may be very similar. In theory, hosts should use flexible recognition rules that maximize the likelihood of rejecting cuckoo nestlings while minimizing the risk of rejecting their own young. Our previous work revealed that female superb fairy-wrens Malurus cyaneus often abandoned nestling cuckoos and that the presence of a single chick in the nest was 1 trigger for abandonment because fairy-wrens also sometimes abandoned a single fairy-wren chick. Here we use a combination of 20 years of observational data, a cross-fostering experiment, and a brood size reduction experiment to determine the basis for individual variability in the chick-rejection rules of superb fairy-wrens in response to parasitism by Horsfield's bronze-cuckoos Chalcites basalis. We show that the decision to abandon a single chick is based on integration of learned recognition cues and external cues. Experienced females were relatively more likely to abandon a single cuckoo chick and accept a single fairy-wren chick than naive females. Breeding experience therefore facilitates the ability to make an accurate rejection decision, perhaps through learned refinement of the recognition template. In addition, fairy-wrens modified their rejection threshold in relation to the presence of adult cuckoos in the population, becoming more likely to abandon single nestlings with increasing risk of parasitism. By using these flexible rejection rules, female superb fairy-wrens are more likely to defend themselves successfully against exploitation by the cuckoo and are less prone to mistakenly reject their own offspring. Copyright 2009, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Naomi E. Langmore & Andrew Cockburn & Andrew F. Russell & Rebecca M. Kilner, 2009. "Flexible cuckoo chick-rejection rules in the superb fairy-wren," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 20(5), pages 978-984.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:20:y:2009:i:5:p:978-984
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arp086
    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. N. E. Langmore & W. E. Feeney & J. Crowe-Riddell & H. Luan & K. M. Louwrens & A. Cockburn, 2012. "Learned recognition of brood parasitic cuckoos in the superb fairy-wren Malurus cyaneus," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 23(4), pages 798-805.
    2. William E. Feeney & Mary Caswell Stoddard & Rebecca M. Kilner & Naomi E. Langmore, 2014. ""Jack-of-all-trades" egg mimicry in the brood parasitic Horsfield’s bronze-cuckoo?," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 25(6), pages 1365-1373.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:20:y:2009:i:5:p:978-984. 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.