Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem
dc.contributor.author
Scardamaglia, Romina Clara
dc.contributor.author
Fiorini, Vanina Dafne
dc.contributor.author
Kacelnik, Alex
dc.contributor.author
Reboreda, Juan Carlos
dc.date.available
2018-11-27T18:15:08Z
dc.date.issued
2017-01
dc.identifier.citation
Scardamaglia, Romina Clara; Fiorini, Vanina Dafne; Kacelnik, Alex; Reboreda, Juan Carlos; Planning host exploitation through prospecting visits by parasitic cowbirds; Springer; Behavioral Ecology And Sociobiology; 71; 1; 1-2017; 1-10
dc.identifier.issn
0340-5443
dc.identifier.uri
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/65352
dc.description.abstract
Abstract: We studied visits to potential host nests by two avian brood parasites, the host generalist shiny cowbird, Molothrus bonariensis, and the host specialist screaming cowbird, Molothrus rufoaxillaris, in the periods preceding and overlapping the laying period of their hosts. Our goal was to examine the hypothesis that during prelaying visits, cowbird females form a dynamic memory library of laying opportunities, which they deploy to target suitable nests at a later predawn period. We recorded presence of radio-tagged females within a fixed area around nests of chalked-browed mockingbirds, Mimus saturninus (a common host of shiny cowbirds), and baywings, Agelaioides badius (the main host of screaming cowbirds), using proximity data loggers placed at nests during prelaying, laying and early incubation. Our data confirmed that females of both species visit potential host nests prior to laying and that parasitic events occurred before dawn, earlier in screaming than shiny cowbirds but with little chance of host nests having been discovered on the laying day. There were interesting species differences: visits were less frequent in shiny than screaming cowbirds and the former rarely returned after laying, while screaming cowbirds visited nests repeatedly after laying and occasionally showed repeat parasitism. The higher frequency of revisiting by screaming cowbirds to baywing nests is consistent with the uncommonly long and variable baywing prelaying period, and the incidence of repeat parasitism may reflect low availability of baywing nests and greater flexibility of its parental care potential thanks to it being a social breeder. Significance statement: Avian brood parasites synchronize their laying with that of their hosts, as this reduces egg rejection and optimizes hatching time. They also avoid parasitizing nests repeatedly, thus preventing harm to their own previously laid eggs and competition among their offspring. Further, they lay at dawn, so that location of target nests must be known from previous days’ exploration. It has been argued that these adaptations must depend on memory for the location and status of host nests within their home range, a memory feat known as ‘bookkeeping’. We study nest prospecting in a host specialist and a host generalist parasitic cowbird, using a combination of proximity radio tracking and video recordings. Our results confirm the prospecting hypothesis, report previously unknown interspecies differences and illustrate how cognitive adaptations can be studied in the context of field behavioural ecology.
dc.format
application/pdf
dc.language.iso
eng
dc.publisher
Springer
dc.rights
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rights.uri
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
dc.subject
Automated Telemetry
dc.subject
Brood Parasitism
dc.subject
Molothrus Bonariensis
dc.subject
Molothrus Rufoaxillaris
dc.subject
Nest Searching
dc.subject.classification
Otras Ciencias Biológicas
dc.subject.classification
Ciencias Biológicas
dc.subject.classification
CIENCIAS NATURALES Y EXACTAS
dc.title
Planning host exploitation through prospecting visits by parasitic cowbirds
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type
info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.date.updated
2018-10-23T18:32:46Z
dc.journal.volume
71
dc.journal.number
1
dc.journal.pagination
1-10
dc.journal.pais
Alemania
dc.journal.ciudad
Berlin
dc.description.fil
Fil: Scardamaglia, Romina Clara. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Ciudad Universitaria. Instituto de Ecología, Genética y Evolución de Buenos Aires. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Ecología, Genética y Evolución de Buenos Aires; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Departamento de Ecología, Genética y Evolución; Argentina
dc.description.fil
Fil: Fiorini, Vanina Dafne. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Ciudad Universitaria. Instituto de Ecología, Genética y Evolución de Buenos Aires. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Ecología, Genética y Evolución de Buenos Aires; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Departamento de Ecología, Genética y Evolución; Argentina
dc.description.fil
Fil: Kacelnik, Alex. University of Oxford; Reino Unido
dc.description.fil
Fil: Reboreda, Juan Carlos. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Ciudad Universitaria. Instituto de Ecología, Genética y Evolución de Buenos Aires. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Ecología, Genética y Evolución de Buenos Aires; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Departamento de Ecología, Genética y Evolución; Argentina
dc.journal.title
Behavioral Ecology And Sociobiology
dc.relation.alternativeid
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00265-016-2250-8
dc.relation.alternativeid
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00265-016-2250-8
Archivos asociados