Cargando…
Turn-taking in cooperative offspring care: by-product of individual provisioning behavior or active response rule?
ABSTRACT: For individuals collaborating to rear offspring, effective organization of resource delivery is difficult because each carer benefits when the others provide a greater share of the total investment required. When investment is provided in discrete events, one possible solution is to adopt...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5644705/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29081573 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00265-017-2391-4 |
_version_ | 1783271777039810560 |
---|---|
author | Savage, James L. Browning, Lucy E. Manica, Andrea Russell, Andrew F. Johnstone, Rufus A. |
author_facet | Savage, James L. Browning, Lucy E. Manica, Andrea Russell, Andrew F. Johnstone, Rufus A. |
author_sort | Savage, James L. |
collection | PubMed |
description | ABSTRACT: For individuals collaborating to rear offspring, effective organization of resource delivery is difficult because each carer benefits when the others provide a greater share of the total investment required. When investment is provided in discrete events, one possible solution is to adopt a turn-taking strategy whereby each individual reduces its contribution rate after investing, only increasing its rate again once another carer contributes. To test whether turn-taking occurs in a natural cooperative care system, here we use a continuous time Markov model to deduce the provisioning behavior of the chestnut-crowned babbler (Pomatostomus ruficeps), a cooperatively breeding Australian bird with variable number of carers. Our analysis suggests that turn-taking occurs across a range of group sizes (2–6), with individual birds being more likely to visit following other individuals than to make repeat visits. We show using a randomization test that some of this apparent turn-taking arises as a by-product of the distribution of individual inter-visit intervals (“passive” turn-taking) but that individuals also respond actively to the investment of others over and above this effect (“active” turn-taking). We conclude that turn-taking in babblers is a consequence of both their individual provisioning behavior and deliberate response rules, with the former effect arising through a minimum interval required to forage and travel to and from the nest. Our results reinforce the importance of considering fine-scale investment dynamics when studying parental care and suggest that behavioral rules such as turn-taking may be more common than previously thought. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Caring for offspring is a crucial stage in the life histories of many animals and often involves conflict as each carer typically benefits when others contribute a greater share of the work required. One way to resolve this conflict is to monitor when other carers contribute and adopt a simple “turn-taking” rule to ensure fairness, but natural parental care has rarely been studied in sufficient detail to identify such rules. Our study investigates whether cooperatively breeding chestnut-crowned babblers “take turns” delivering food to offspring, and (if so) whether this a deliberate strategy or simply a by-product of independent care behavior. We find that babblers indeed take turns and conclude that part of the observed turn-taking is due to deliberate responsiveness, with the rest arising from the species’ breeding ecology. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00265-017-2391-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5644705 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-56447052017-10-27 Turn-taking in cooperative offspring care: by-product of individual provisioning behavior or active response rule? Savage, James L. Browning, Lucy E. Manica, Andrea Russell, Andrew F. Johnstone, Rufus A. Behav Ecol Sociobiol Original Article ABSTRACT: For individuals collaborating to rear offspring, effective organization of resource delivery is difficult because each carer benefits when the others provide a greater share of the total investment required. When investment is provided in discrete events, one possible solution is to adopt a turn-taking strategy whereby each individual reduces its contribution rate after investing, only increasing its rate again once another carer contributes. To test whether turn-taking occurs in a natural cooperative care system, here we use a continuous time Markov model to deduce the provisioning behavior of the chestnut-crowned babbler (Pomatostomus ruficeps), a cooperatively breeding Australian bird with variable number of carers. Our analysis suggests that turn-taking occurs across a range of group sizes (2–6), with individual birds being more likely to visit following other individuals than to make repeat visits. We show using a randomization test that some of this apparent turn-taking arises as a by-product of the distribution of individual inter-visit intervals (“passive” turn-taking) but that individuals also respond actively to the investment of others over and above this effect (“active” turn-taking). We conclude that turn-taking in babblers is a consequence of both their individual provisioning behavior and deliberate response rules, with the former effect arising through a minimum interval required to forage and travel to and from the nest. Our results reinforce the importance of considering fine-scale investment dynamics when studying parental care and suggest that behavioral rules such as turn-taking may be more common than previously thought. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Caring for offspring is a crucial stage in the life histories of many animals and often involves conflict as each carer typically benefits when others contribute a greater share of the work required. One way to resolve this conflict is to monitor when other carers contribute and adopt a simple “turn-taking” rule to ensure fairness, but natural parental care has rarely been studied in sufficient detail to identify such rules. Our study investigates whether cooperatively breeding chestnut-crowned babblers “take turns” delivering food to offspring, and (if so) whether this a deliberate strategy or simply a by-product of independent care behavior. We find that babblers indeed take turns and conclude that part of the observed turn-taking is due to deliberate responsiveness, with the rest arising from the species’ breeding ecology. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00265-017-2391-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017-10-17 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5644705/ /pubmed/29081573 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00265-017-2391-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Savage, James L. Browning, Lucy E. Manica, Andrea Russell, Andrew F. Johnstone, Rufus A. Turn-taking in cooperative offspring care: by-product of individual provisioning behavior or active response rule? |
title | Turn-taking in cooperative offspring care: by-product of individual provisioning behavior or active response rule? |
title_full | Turn-taking in cooperative offspring care: by-product of individual provisioning behavior or active response rule? |
title_fullStr | Turn-taking in cooperative offspring care: by-product of individual provisioning behavior or active response rule? |
title_full_unstemmed | Turn-taking in cooperative offspring care: by-product of individual provisioning behavior or active response rule? |
title_short | Turn-taking in cooperative offspring care: by-product of individual provisioning behavior or active response rule? |
title_sort | turn-taking in cooperative offspring care: by-product of individual provisioning behavior or active response rule? |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5644705/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29081573 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00265-017-2391-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT savagejamesl turntakingincooperativeoffspringcarebyproductofindividualprovisioningbehaviororactiveresponserule AT browninglucye turntakingincooperativeoffspringcarebyproductofindividualprovisioningbehaviororactiveresponserule AT manicaandrea turntakingincooperativeoffspringcarebyproductofindividualprovisioningbehaviororactiveresponserule AT russellandrewf turntakingincooperativeoffspringcarebyproductofindividualprovisioningbehaviororactiveresponserule AT johnstonerufusa turntakingincooperativeoffspringcarebyproductofindividualprovisioningbehaviororactiveresponserule |