Foraging intention affects whether willow tits call to attract members of mixed-species flocks

Understanding how individual behaviour influences the spatial and temporal distribution of other species is necessary to resolve the complex structure of species assemblages. Mixed-species bird flocks provide an ideal opportunity to investigate this issue, because members of the flocks are involved in a variety of behavioural interactions between species. Willow tits (Poecile montanus) often produce loud calls when visiting a new foraging patch to recruit other members of mixed-species flocks. The costs and benefits of flocking would differ with individual foraging behaviours (i.e. immediate consumption or caching); thus, willow tits may adjust the production of loud calls according to their foraging intention. In this study, we investigated the link between foraging decisions and calling behaviour in willow tits and tested its influence on the temporal cohesion with members of mixed-species flocks. Observations at experimental foraging patches showed that willow tits produced more calls when they consumed food items compared with when they cached them. Playback experiments revealed that these calls attracted flock members and helped to maintain their presence at foraging patches. Thus, willow tits adjusted calling behaviour according to their foraging intention, thereby coordinating the associations with members of mixed-species flocks. Our findings demonstrate the influence of individual decision-making on temporal cohesion with other species and highlight the importance of interspecific communication in mixed-species flocking dynamics.

[1]  William Hoppitt,et al.  Interspecific social networks promote information transmission in wild songbirds , 2015, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[2]  Toshitaka N. Suzuki.  Communication about predator type by a bird using discrete, graded and combinatorial variation in alarm calls , 2014, Animal Behaviour.

[3]  P. Petraitis,et al.  Inferring multiple causality : the limitations of path analysis , 1996 .

[4]  M. Oommen,et al.  Shrewd alliances: mixed foraging associations between treeshrews, greater racket-tailed drongos and sparrowhawks on Great Nicobar Island, India , 2010, Biology Letters.

[5]  I. Krams.  Communication in crested tits and the risk of predation , 2001, Animal Behaviour.

[6]  A. Brodin.  Theoretical models of adaptive energy management in small wintering birds , 2007, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[7]  Todd M. Freeberg,et al.  Chick-a-dee call variation in Carolina chickadees and recruiting flockmates to food , 2009 .

[8]  J. Altmann,et al.  Observational study of behavior: sampling methods. , 1974, Behaviour.

[9]  Donald E. Kroodsma,et al.  Pseudoreplication in playback experiments, revisited a decade later , 2001, Animal Behaviour.

[10]  Food Storing Behaviour of Willow Tit Parus montanus , 1988 .

[11]  L. Sasvári.  Observational learning in great, blue and marsh tits , 1979, Animal Behaviour.

[12]  Erick Greene,et al.  Nuthatches eavesdrop on variations in heterospecific chickadee mobbing alarm calls , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[13]  Kathryn E. Sieving,et al.  Antipredator calls of tufted titmice and interspecific transfer of encoded threat information , 2012 .

[14]  Michael L. Avery,et al.  The versatility of graded acoustic measures in classification of predation threats by the tufted titmouse Baeolophus bicolor: exploring a mixed framework for threat communication , 2010 .

[15]  Todd M. Freeberg,et al.  Variation in Note Composition of Chick-a-dee Calls is Associated with Signaler Flight in Carolina Chickadees, Poecile carolinensis , 2013 .

[16]  D. Bates,et al.  Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 , 2014, 1406.5823.

[17]  D. Farine,et al.  Social networks predict patch discovery in a wild population of songbirds , 2012, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[18]  Tom V. Smulders,et al.  Hyperdispersed cache distributions reduce pilferage: a field study , 2007, Animal Behaviour.

[19]  M. Elgar.  House sparrows establish foraging flocks by giving chirrup calls if the resources are divisible , 1986, Animal Behaviour.

[20]  Stuart Bearhop,et al.  The importance of fission–fusion social group dynamics in birds , 2014 .

[21]  T. Hino.  Mutualistic and commensal organization of avian mixed-species foraging flocks in a forest of western Madagascar , 1998 .

[22]  J. Rappole,et al.  Kleptoparasitism of laughingthrushes Garrulax by Greater Racket-tailed Drongos Dicrurus paradiseus in Myanmar , 2001 .

[23]  Toshitaka N. Suzuki.  Long-Distance Calling by the Willow Tit, Poecile montanus, Facilitates Formation of Mixed-Species Foraging Flocks , 2012 .

[24]  E. Goodale,et al.  Vocal mimicry by a passerine bird attracts other species involved in mixed-species flocks , 2006, Animal Behaviour.

[25]  H. Schielzeth.  Simple means to improve the interpretability of regression coefficients , 2010 .

[26]  Kartik Shanker,et al.  Why do birds participate in mixed-species foraging flocks? A large-scale synthesis , 2009, Animal Behaviour.

[27]  L. Carrascal.  FOOD CACHING VERSUS IMMEDIATE CONSUMPTION IN THE NUTHATCH: THE EFFECT OF SOCIAL CONTEXT , 1993 .

[28]  R. R. Krausz.  Living in Groups , 2013 .

[29]  Graeme D Ruxton,et al.  Interspecific information transfer influences animal community structure. , 2010, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[30]  Z. Emberts,et al.  Social Information on Fear and Food Drives Animal Grouping and Fitness , 2017, The American Naturalist.

[31]  Damien R. Farine,et al.  The role of social and ecological processes in structuring animal populations: a case study from automated tracking of wild birds , 2015, Royal Society Open Science.

[32]  T. Freeberg,et al.  Diversity in mixed species groups improves success in a novel feeder test in a wild songbird community , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[33]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[34]  Toshitaka N. Suzuki.  Calling at a Food Source: Context-Dependent Variation in Note Composition of Combinatorial Calls in Willow Tits , 2012 .

[35]  Jeffrey R. Lucas,et al.  “Information” and the chick-a-dee call: Communicating with a complex vocal system , 2007 .

[36]  Damien R. Farine,et al.  Collective decision making and social interaction rules in mixed-species flocks of songbirds , 2014, Animal Behaviour.

[37]  J. Lucas,et al.  Linking social complexity and vocal complexity: a parid perspective , 2012, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[38]  D. H. Morse,et al.  Ecological Aspects of Some Mixed-Species Foraging Flocks of Birds , 1970 .

[39]  John M. Fryxell,et al.  Individual Behavior and Community Dynamics , 1997, Population and Community Biology Series.

[40]  David Wheatcroft,et al.  Species replacement reduces community participation in avian antipredator groups , 2016 .

[41]  Erick Greene,et al.  Allometry of Alarm Calls: Black-Capped Chickadees Encode Information About Predator Size , 2005, Science.

[42]  J. Hayashi.  [Sampling methods]. , 1982, Josanpu zasshi = The Japanese journal for midwife.

[43]  V. Pravosudov.  Mountain chickadees discriminate between potential cache pilferers and non-pilferers , 2008, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[44]  The early bird gets the worm: foraging strategies of wild songbirds lead to the early discovery of food sources , 2013, Biology Letters.

[45]  Toshitaka N. Suzuki.  Referential calls coordinate multi-species mobbing in a forest bird community , 2015, Journal of Ethology.