AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
PDF (1.1 MB)
Collect
Submit Manuscript AI Chat Paper
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Research Article | Open Access

Investigating how different classes of nest predators respond to the playback of the begging calls of nestling birds

Shilong LiuQiao XieAiwu Jiang( )Eben Goodale
Guangxi Key Laboratory of Forest Ecology and Conservation, College of Forestry, Guangxi University, Nanning, 530004, China
Show Author Information

Abstract

Begging brings benefits and costs for nestling birds: it can indicate their needs to their parents, but it can also be a cue used by predators to find the nest. The costs, like many variables related to nest predation, can be specific to what kinds of predators are present and their auditory capabilities. These costs and benefits could also be affected by human noise, as noise could disrupt communication to parents and eavesdropping by predators, although human-produced noise might be easily ignored if predators can hear high-frequency components of the begging. We studied nest predation on a generalist bird, the Red-whiskered Bulbul (Pycnonotus jocosus), in a tropical forest in which there are many kinds of nest predators, including birds, mammals and reptiles. In 20 natural nests in which artificial eggs were placed, and subsequently in 140 artificial nests, we broadcast recordings of begging nestlings, with and without traffic noise, at two volume levels. We hypothesized that playback would increase predation relative to a silent control, and that mixing in traffic noise with the begging would decrease predation, as the begging signal was masked. However, we hypothesized that some predators, particularly small mammals with sensitive high-frequency hearing, might ignore the traffic noise. We found that predation was lowest for the control treatment, and lower for treatments mixed with traffic noise than for those without it. Small mammals, however, showed an unexpected pattern, displaying less nest predation in the treatments with traffic noise. Our results demonstrate the human-associated noise can disturb nest predators and influence which kinds of predators use begging to locate nests.

References

 

Bednarz, P.A., 2021. Do decibels matter? A review of effects of traffic noise on terrestrial small mammals and bats. Pol. J. Ecol. 68, 323-333.

 

Brawn, J.D., Angehr, G., Davros, N., Robinson, W.D., Styrsky, J.N., Tarwater, C.E., 2011. Sources of variation in the nesting success of understory tropical birds. J. Avian Biol. 42, 61-68.

 

Brumm, H., Zollinger, S.A., 2011. The evolution of the Lombard effect: 100 years of psychoacoustic research. Behaviour 148, 1173-1198.

 

Chalfoun, A.D., Thompson Ⅲ, F.R., Ratnaswamy, M.J., 2002. Nest predators and fragmentation: a review and meta-analysis. Conserv. Biol. 16, 306-318.

 

Chotprasertkoon, T., Pierce, A.J., Savini, T., Round, P.D., Sankamethawee, W., Gale, G.A., 2017. Influence of vegetation cover on nest cavity selection and nesting success of White-rumped Shamas (Copsychus malabaricus): an experimental test. Wilson J. Ornithol. 129, 727-741.

 

DeGregorio, B.A., Chiavacci, S.J., Benson, T.J., Sperry, J.H., Weatherhead, P.J., 2016. Nest predators of North American birds: continental patterns and implications. Bioscience 66, 655-665.

 
Fair, J., Paul, E., Jones, J., 2010. Guidelines to the Use of Wild Birds in Research. Ornithological Council, Washington D.C.
 

Francis, C.D., Barber, J.R., 2013. A framework for understanding noise impacts on wildlife: an urgent conservation priority. Front. Ecol. Environ. 11, 305-313.

 

Francis, C.D., Ortega, C.P., Cruz, A., 2009. Noise pollution changes avian communities and species interactions. Curr. Biol. 19, 1415-1419.

 

Haff, T.M., Magrath, R.D., 2011. Calling at a cost: elevated nestling calling attracts predators to active nests. Biol. Lett. 7, 493-495.

 

Haskell, D., 1994. Experimental evidence that nestling begging behaviour incurs a cost due to nest predation. Proc. R. Soc. B. 257, 161-164.

 

Haskell, D., 1999. The effect of predation on begging-call evolution in nestling wood warblers. Anim. Behav. 57, 893-901.

 

Hothorn, T., Bretz, F., Westfall, P., 2008. Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. Biom. J. 50, 346-363.

 

Hu, Q., Wen, Y., Yu, G., Yin, J., Guan, H., Lv, L., et al., 2020. Research activity does not affect nest predation rates of the Silver-throated Tit, a passerine bird building domed nests. Avian Res. 11, 28.

 

Ibáñez-Álamo, J.D., Arco, L., Soler, M., 2012a. Experimental evidence for a predation cost of begging using active nests and real chicks. J. Ornithol. 153, 801-807.

 

Ibáñez-Álamo, J.D., Magrath, R.D., Oteyza, J.C., Chalfoun, A.D., Haff, T.M., Schmidt, K.A., et al., 2015. Nest predation research: recent findings and future perspectives. J. Ornithol. 156, S247-S262.

 

Ibáñez-Álamo, J.D., Sanllorente, O., Soler, M., 2012b. The impact of researcher disturbance on nest predation rates: a meta-analysis. Ibis 154, 5-14.

 

Ibáñez-Álamo, J.D., Soler, M., 2010. Investigator activities reduce nest predation in blackbirds Turdus merula. J. Avian Biol. 41, 208-212.

 

Jiang, A., Jiang, D., Zhou, F., Goodale, E., 2017. Nest-site selection and breeding ecology of Streaked Wren-Babbler (Napothera brevicaudata) in a tropical limestone forest of southern China. Avian Res. 8, 28.

 

Jiang, D., Nong, Z., Jiang, A., Luo, X., 2015. Breeding ecology and nest site selection of Red-whiskered Bulbul (Pycnonotus jocosus) in limestone area, northern tropical region of China. Chin. J. Zool. 50, 359-365.

 

Jiang, D., Zhou, F., Chen, T., Jiang, A., 2013. Breeding notes on 18 bird species in limestone area of southwestern Guangxi. Chin. J. Zool. 48, 597-604.

 

Khamcha, D., Powell, L.A., Gale, G.A., 2018. Effects of roadside edge on nest predators and nest survival of Asian tropical forest birds. Global Ecol. Conserv. 16, e00450.

 

Klump, G.M., Kretzschmar, E., Curio, E., 1986. The hearing of an avian predator and its avian prey. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 18, 317-323.

 

Leighton, P.A., Horrocks, J.A., Kramer, D.L., 2010. Conservation and the scarecrow effect: can human activity benefit threatened species by displacing predators? Biol. Conserv. 143, 2156-2163.

 

Leonard, M.L., Horn, A.G., 2005. Ambient noise and the design of begging signals. Proc. R. Soc. B. 272, 651-656.

 

Li, H., Goodale, E., Quan, R. -C., 2019. Nest predation on an abundant generalist bird in tropical China. Wilson J. Ornithol. 131, 514-523.

 

Magrath, R.D., Haff, T.M., Horn, A.G., Leonard, M.L., 2010. Calling in the face of danger: predation risk and acoustic communication by parent birds and their offspring. Adv. Stud. Behav. 41, 187-253.

 

Martin, T.E., 2015. Age-related mortality explains life history strategies of tropical and temperate songbirds. Science 349, 966-970.

 

Martin, T.E., Scott, J., Menge, C., 2000. Nest predation increases with parental activity: separating nest site and parental activity effects. Proc. R. Soc. B. 267, 2287-2293.

 

McDonald, P.G., Wilson, D.R., Evans, C.S., 2009. Nestling begging increases predation risk, regardless of spectral characteristics or avian mobbing. Behav. Ecol. 20, 821-829.

 

McGregor, R.L., Bender, D.J., Fahrig, L., 2008. Do small mammals avoid roads because of the traffic? J. Appl. Ecol. 45, 117-123.

 

Miller, J.R., Hobbs, N.T., 2000. Recreational trails, human activity, and nest predation in lowland riparian areas. Landsc. Urban Plann. 50, 227-236.

 

Moreno-Rueda, G., 2005. A trade-off between predation risk and sibling competition in the begging behavior of Coal and Great Tits. J. Field Ornithol. 76, 390-394.

 

Nemeth, E., Brumm, H., 2010. Birds and anthropogenic noise: Are urban songs adaptive? Am. Nat. 176, 465-475.

 

Pierce, A.J., Pobprasert, K., 2013. Nest predators of southeast Asian evergreen forest birds identified through continuous video recording. Ibis 155, 419-423.

 

Platzen, D., Magrath, R.D., 2004. Parental alarm calls suppress nestling vocalization. Proc. R. Soc. B. 271, 1271-1276.

 

Portfors, C.V., 2007. Types and functions of ultrasonic vocalizations in laboratory rats and mice. J. Am. Assoc. Lab. Anim. Sci. 46, 28-34.

 
R Core Team, 2021. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. https://www.R-project.org/.
 

Ricklefs, R.E., 1969. An Analysis of Nesting Mortality in Birds. Smithsonian Institute Press, Washington, DC.

 

Slabbekoorn, H., Peet, M., 2003. Birds sing at a higher pitch in urban noise. Nature 424, 267, 267.

 

Soanes, R., Peters, A., Delhey, K., Doody, J.S., 2015. The influence of nest-site choice and predator sensory cues on nesting success in the Crimson Finch (Neochmia phaeton). Emu 115, 317-325.

 

Somsiri, K., Gale, G.A., Pierce, A.J., Khamcha, D., Sankamethawee, W., 2020. Habitat structure affects nest predation of the Scaly-crowned Babbler (Malacopteron cinereum) by macaques and snakes in a Thai-seasonal evergreen forest. J. Ornithol. 161, 389-398.

 

Stephens, S.E., Koons, D.N., Rotella, J.J., Willey, D.W., 2004. Effects of habitat fragmentation on avian nesting success: a review of the evidence at multiple spatial scales. Biol. Conserv. 115, 101-110.

 

Stutchbury, B.J., Morton, E.S., 2001. Behavioral Ecology of Tropical Birds. Academic Press, London.

 

Tan, X., Liu, S., Goodale, E., Jiang, A., 2022. Does bird photography affect nest predation and feeding frequency? Avian Res. 13, 100036.

 

Thompson Ⅲ, F.R., Burhans, D.E., 2004. Differences in predators of artificial and real songbird nests: evidence of bias in artificial nest studies. Conserv. Biol. 18, 373-380.

 

Vetter, D., Rücker, G., Storch, I., 2013. A meta-analysis of tropical forest edge effects on bird nest predation risk: edge effects in avian nest predation. Biol. Conserv. 159, 382-395.

 

Vincze, E., Seress, G., Lagisz, M., Nakagawa, S., Dingemanse, N.J., Sprau, P., 2017. Does urbanization affect predation of bird nests? A meta-analysis. Front. Ecol. Evol. 5, 29.

 

Zanette, L., 2002. What do artificial nests tells us about nest predation? Biol. Conserv. 103, 323-329.

Avian Research
Article number: 100044
Cite this article:
Liu S, Xie Q, Jiang A, et al. Investigating how different classes of nest predators respond to the playback of the begging calls of nestling birds. Avian Research, 2022, 13(3): 100044. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avrs.2022.100044

606

Views

21

Downloads

1

Crossref

0

Web of Science

1

Scopus

0

CSCD

Altmetrics

Received: 20 May 2022
Revised: 15 June 2022
Accepted: 15 June 2022
Published: 22 June 2022
© 2022 The Authors.

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Return