Delayed Dispersal as a Route to Breeding: Territorial Inheritance, Safe Havens, and Ecological Constraints

The relative roles of ecological constraints, the benefits of philopatry, and the role of life history continue to be debated in the evolution of natal philopatry and cooperative breeding. We compare three routes to breeding: departing to search for territories as a floater, staying and queuing to inherit the natal territory, or queuing and eventually shifting to a neighboring vacancy. Our model assumed a dominance‐structured population. It quantifies the benefits of philopatry for varying‐rank subordinates and contrasts it against the benefit of dispersal. We apply the model to data on Siberian jay Perisoreus infaustus, a species in which retained offspring do not help at the nest. The results indicate that territorial inheritance plays a small role in this species (presumably due to inbreeding avoidance), and territory acquisition is less constrained for dispersing than philopatric offspring. Nevertheless, small family groups—one or, at the most, two same‐sex queuers—are predicted to form because philopatric offspring gain nepotistic benefits that improve their survival. This fits with data on group sizes and supports the idea of the natal territory as a safe haven for waiting for breeding opportunities. We also discuss our predictions in the light of ecological constraints and clarify recent confusingly different predictions on the role of habitat saturation as an explanation for delayed dispersal and cooperative breeding. We argue that “ecological constraint” is too wide a term to yield useful predictive power and that it is more appropriate to examine the consequences of specific life‐history traits on the success of dispersers.