IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v23y2012i2p425-433..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Under my wing: lesser kestrels and jackdaws derive reciprocal benefits in mixed-species colonies

Author

Listed:
  • Daniela Campobello
  • Maurizio Sarà
  • James F. Hare

Abstract

In mixed-species assemblages, antipredator benefits for a timid species nesting close to a more pugnacious one are often reported. Advantages for the protected species are usually manifested in terms of higher reproductive success than conspecifics nesting remote to the protector species. Whether the protector species also accrues any benefit remains untested, and the species-specific behavioral traits underlying enhanced reproductive output in mixed-species associations remain poorly documented. We studied associations between lesser kestrels (Falco naumanni) and jackdaws (Corvus monedula) nesting in rural buildings in the Gela Plain (Italy). We tested for interspecific interactions of jackdaws and lesser kestrels by comparing single- and mixed-species colonies in terms of: 1) vigilance, nest attendance, and intra- and interspecific interference and 2) defensive responses shown by each species when confronted with potential predators or competitors. In both species, nesting in mixed associations was accompanied by decreased vigilance. Diminished vigilance, however, was associated with decreased defensive effort for lesser kestrels, whereas jackdaws increased alarm calling, but only in small colonies. Our results reveal a reciprocal influence on behavior of lesser kestrels and jackdaws nesting within the same colony, whereby both species experience decreased energetic expenditures associated with vigilance, but only lesser kestrels appear to benefit via reduced nest defense effort. We discuss our results in light of the possible asymmetrical information transfer triggered by a common set of nest predators that favors the exchange of interspecific information regarding predator detection and defense.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniela Campobello & Maurizio Sarà & James F. Hare, 2012. "Under my wing: lesser kestrels and jackdaws derive reciprocal benefits in mixed-species colonies," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 23(2), pages 425-433.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:23:y:2012:i:2:p:425-433.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arr207
    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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tim Clutton-Brock, 2009. "Cooperation between non-kin in animal societies," Nature, Nature, vol. 462(7269), pages 51-57, November.
    2. Eben Goodale & Sarath W. Kotagama, 2008. "Response to conspecific and heterospecific alarm calls in mixed-species bird flocks of a Sri Lankan rainforest," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 19(4), pages 887-894.
    3. Daniela Campobello & Spencer G. Sealy, 2011. "Use of social over personal information enhances nest defense against avian brood parasitism," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 22(2), pages 422-428.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Friedrich, T., 2009. "Wise exploitation – a game with a higher productivity than cooperation – transforms biological productivity into economic productivity," MPRA Paper 22862, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Som B Ale & Joel S Brown & Amy T Sullivan, 2013. "Evolution of Cooperation: Combining Kin Selection and Reciprocal Altruism into Matrix Games with Social Dilemmas," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(5), pages 1-8, May.
    3. Justin A. Welbergen & Nicholas B. Davies, 2012. "Direct and indirect assessment of parasitism risk by a cuckoo host," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 23(4), pages 783-789.
    4. Quan, Ji & Cui, Shihui & Chen, Wenman & Wang, Xianjia, 2023. "Reputation-based probabilistic punishment on the evolution of cooperation in the spatial public goods game," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 441(C).
    5. Gladys Barragan & Maxime Cauchoix & Anne Regnier & Marie Bourjade & Astrid Hopfensitz & Alexis Chaine, 2021. "Schoolchildren cooperate more successfully with non-kin than with siblings," Post-Print hal-03167067, HAL.
    6. Schimit, P.H.T. & Santos, B.O. & Soares, C.A., 2015. "Evolution of cooperation in Axelrod tournament using cellular automata," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 437(C), pages 204-217.
    7. Feng Zhang & Cang Hui, 2011. "Eco-Evolutionary Feedback and the Invasion of Cooperation in Prisoner's Dilemma Games," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(11), pages 1-7, November.
    8. Sergio Beraldo & Robert Sugden, 2010. "The emergence of reciprocally beneficial cooperation," ICER Working Papers 18-2010, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
    9. Friedrich, T., 2010. "The transfer space," MPRA Paper 23643, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Gao, Lei & Li, Yaotang & Wang, Zhen & Wang, Rui-Wu, 2022. "Asymmetric strategy setup solve the Prisoner’s Dilemma of the evolution of mutualism," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 412(C).
    11. Zhu, Jiabao & Liu, Xingwen, 2021. "The number of strategy changes can be used to promote cooperation in spatial snowdrift game," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 575(C).
    12. Hammerstein, Peter & Leimar, Olof, 2015. "Evolutionary Game Theory in Biology," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    13. Hernando Santamaría-García & Miguel Burgaleta & Agustina Legaz & Daniel Flichtentrei & Mateo Córdoba-Delgado & Juliana Molina-Paredes & Juliana Linares-Puerta & Juan Montealegre-Gómez & Sandra Castelb, 2022. "The price of prosociality in pandemic times," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, December.
    14. Damien Francey & Ralph Bergmüller, 2012. "Images of Eyes Enhance Investments in a Real-Life Public Good," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(5), pages 1-7, May.
    15. Dirk Helbing & Anders Johansson, 2010. "Cooperation, Norms, and Revolutions: A Unified Game-Theoretical Approach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(10), pages 1-15, October.
    16. Hannes Rusch, 2013. "What niche did human cooperativeness evolve in?," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201327, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    17. Ari E. Martínez & Rosana T. Zenil, 2012. "Foraging guild influences dependence on heterospecific alarm calls in Amazonian bird flocks," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 23(3), pages 544-550.
    18. Li-Li Li & Joshua M Plotnik & Shang-Wen Xia & Estelle Meaux & Rui-Chang Quan, 2021. "Cooperating elephants mitigate competition until the stakes get too high," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(9), pages 1-23, September.
    19. Mohammad Salahshour, 2021. "Freedom to choose between public resources promotes cooperation," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(2), pages 1-15, February.
    20. 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.

    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:23:y:2012:i:2:p:425-433.. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.