Interspecific reciprocity explains mobbing behaviour of the breeding chaffinches, Fringilla coelebs

When prey animals discover a predator close by, they mob it while uttering characteristic sounds that attract other prey individuals to the vicinity. Mobbing causes a predator to vacate its immediate foraging area, which gives an opportunity for prey individuals to continue their interrupted daily activity. Besides the increased benefits, mobbing behaviour also has its costs owing to injuries or death. The initiator of mobbing may be at increased risk of predation by attracting the predator's attention, especially if not joined by other neighbouring prey individuals. Communities of breeding birds have always been considered as temporal aggregations. Since an altruist could not prevent cheaters from exploiting its altruism in an anonymous community, this excluded any possibility of explaining mobbing behaviour in terms of reciprocal altruism. However, sedentary birds may have become acquainted since the previous non–breeding season. Migrant birds, forming anonymous communities at the beginning of the breeding season, may also develop closer social ties during the course of the breeding season. We tested whether a male chaffinch, a migrant bird, would initiate active harassment of a predator both at the beginning of the breeding season and a week later when it has become a member of a non–anonymous multi–species aggregation of sedentary birds. We expected that male chaffinches would be less likely to initiate a mob at the beginning of the breeding season when part of an anonymous multi–species aggregation of migratory birds. However, their mobbing activity should increase as the breeding season advances. Our results support these predictions. Cooperation among individuals belonging to different species in driving the predator away may be explained as interspecific reciprocity based on interspecific recognition and temporal stability of the breeding communities.

[1]  J. Ekman.  ECOLOGY OF NON-BREEDING SOCIAL SYSTEMS OF PARUS , 1989 .

[2]  C. Munn.  Birds that ‘cry wolf’ , 1986, Nature.

[3]  W. Hamilton,et al.  The Evolution of Cooperation , 1984 .

[4]  Gerald J. Niemi,et al.  Heterospecific attraction affects community structure and migrant abundances in northern breeding bird communities , 1997 .

[5]  T. Clutton‐Brock,et al.  Punishment in animal societies , 1995, Nature.

[6]  M. Mönkkönen,et al.  Aggregate dispersion of birds after encountering a predator: experimental evidence , 1998 .

[7]  P. Sherman.  Nepotism and the evolution of alarm calls. , 1977, Science.

[8]  S. Fretwell,et al.  Distress Screams as a Measure of Kinship in Birds , 1976 .

[9]  W. Dominey,et al.  Mobbing in colonially nesting fishes, especially the bluegill, Lepomis macrochirus , 1983 .

[10]  Jorma Sorjonen,et al.  Factors Affecting the Structure of Song and the Singing Behaviour of Some Northern European Passerine Birds , 1986 .

[11]  S. Lane,et al.  Coal tits increase evening body mass in response to tawny owl calls , 2000, acta ethologica.

[12]  D. Buitron.  Variability in the Responses of Black-Billed Magpies To Natural Predators , 1983 .

[13]  Peter Marler,et al.  Specific Distinctiveness in the Communication Signals of Birds , 1957 .

[14]  P. Greig-Smith.  Parental investment in nest defence by stonechats (Saxicola torquata) , 1980, Animal Behaviour.

[15]  P. Sherman,et al.  ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF BANK SWALLOW (RIPARIA RIPARIA) COLONIALITY , 1976 .

[16]  I. Krams.  Perch selection by singing chaffinches: a better view of surroundings and the risk of predation , 2001 .

[17]  H. Southern,et al.  Owls of Europe , 1983 .

[18]  K. Zuberbühler,et al.  The Predator Deterrence Function of Primate Alarm Calls , 1999 .

[19]  Christine R. Hurd.  Interspecific attraction to the mobbing calls of black-capped chickadees (Parus atricapillus) , 1996, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[20]  M. Mönkkönen,et al.  Heterospecific attraction and food resources in migrants' breeding patch selection in northern boreal forest , 1998, Oecologia.

[21]  E. Curio,et al.  The adaptive significance of avian mobbing: I. Teleonomic hypotheses and predictions. , 1978 .

[22]  Anne E. Magurran,et al.  Dicing with death: predator inspection behaviour in minnow shoals , 1986 .

[23]  C. Perrins,et al.  Birds of the Western Palearctic , 1978, Nature.

[24]  T. Slagsvold.  Habitat Selection in Birds: On the Presence of Other Bird Species with Special Regard to Turdus pilaris , 1980 .

[25]  M. Mönkkönen,et al.  Mixed-species foraging aggregations and heterospecific attraction in boreal bird communities , 1996 .

[26]  Richard A. Pettifor,et al.  The effects of avian mobbing on a potential predator, the European kestrel, Falco tinnunculus , 1990, Animal Behaviour.

[27]  W. Hamilton.  The genetical evolution of social behaviour. I. , 1964, Journal of theoretical biology.

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

[29]  R. Hinde.  Factors governing the changes in strength of a partially inborn response, as shown by the mobbing behaviour of the chaffinch (Fringilla coelebs) - I. The nature of the response, and an examination of its course , 1954, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B - Biological Sciences.

[30]  R. Trivers.  The Evolution of Reciprocal Altruism , 1971, The Quarterly Review of Biology.

[31]  W. Hamilton.  Geometry for the selfish herd. , 1971, Journal of theoretical biology.

[32]  J. Terborgh,et al.  Multi-Species Territoriality in Neotropical Foraging Flocks , 1979 .

[33]  P. Helle,et al.  Alarm calling by individual willow tits, Parus montanus , 1990, Animal Behaviour.

[34]  Susan M. Smith.  The Black-Capped Chickadee: Behavioral Ecology and Natural History , 1992 .

[35]  S. Altmann.  AVIAN MOBBING BEHAVIOR AND PREDATOR RECOGNITION , 1956 .