The type and timing of social information alters offspring production

The acquisition and use of information are essential for decision-making in an uncertain world. The use of social information, or information from the behaviour of others, may be a common and efficient mechanism to improve estimates of resource quality by animals. According to theory, social information cues with higher information content should have a greater influence on decision-making, and current information should be weighed more than prior information. However, experimental tests of these hypotheses remain scarce. We exposed female cactus bugs (Chelinidea vittiger) to different types of social information (the presence of conspecific eggs or nymphs) presented at different times (current or prior to egg laying) to determine the influence of social information on offspring production. We found that social information substantially altered the number of eggs produced. The presence of conspecific eggs, regardless of timing, consistently increased egg production, whereas nymphs only increased egg production when present during egg laying. We conclude that the type and timing of social information may have an important, yet unappreciated, influence on reproductive allocation.

[1]  Kevin N Laland,et al.  Nine-spined sticklebacks exploit the most reliable source when public and private information conflict , 2004, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[2]  K. E. Bonnie,et al.  Expanding the scope for social information use , 2007, Animal Behaviour.

[3]  M. Koops Reliability and the value of information , 2004, Animal Behaviour.

[4]  Mikko Mönkkönen,et al.  Social information use is a process across time, space, and ecology, reaching heterospecifics. , 2007, Ecology.

[5]  Sasha R. X. Dall,et al.  Information and its use by animals in evolutionary ecology. , 2005, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[6]  T. Valone,et al.  Potential disadvantages of using socially acquired information. , 2002, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[7]  T. Valone,et al.  Public Information: From Nosy Neighbors to Cultural Evolution , 2004, Science.

[8]  Jean Clobert,et al.  Public Information and Breeding Habitat Selection in a Wild Bird Population , 2002, Science.

[9]  B. Doligez,et al.  When to use public information for breeding habitat selection? The role of environmental predictability and density dependence , 2003, Animal Behaviour.

[10]  Robert J Fletcher,et al.  Emergent properties of conspecific attraction in fragmented landscapes. , 2006, The American naturalist.

[11]  R. Fletcher Species interactions and population density mediate the use of social cues for habitat selection. , 2007, The Journal of animal ecology.

[12]  John A. Wiens,et al.  Movements of cactus bugs: Patch transfers, matrix resistance, and edge permeability , 2004, Landscape Ecology.

[13]  Thomas J Valone,et al.  Public information for the assessment of quality: a widespread social phenomenon. , 2002, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[14]  L. Schoonhoven Host-marking pheromones in lepidoptera, with special reference to twoPieris spp , 1990, Journal of Chemical Ecology.

[15]  L. Gustafsson,et al.  Competitor density cues for habitat quality facilitating habitat selection and investment decisions , 2008 .

[16]  L. Giraldeau,et al.  Inadvertent social information in breeding site selection of natal dispersing birds , 2006, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[17]  L. Andres Cactus-Feeding Insects and Mites , 1969 .