Literature DB >> 12508530

The adaptiveness of defence strategies against cuckoo parasitism.

Robert Planqué1, Nicholas F Britton, Nigel R Franks, Mark A Peletier.   

Abstract

Host bird species of the Eurasian Cuckoo, Cuculus canorus, often display egg-discrimination behaviour but chick-rejection behaviour has never been reported. In this paper, we analyse a host-cuckoo association in which both population dynamics and evolutionary dynamics are explored in a discrete-time model. We introduce four host types, each with their own defence behaviour, displaying either egg or chick rejection, neither or both, We also introduce fitness functions for each of these host types. Although we can characterize the long term behaviour in many cases by a simple heuristic argument which is in accordance with common views in ecology, there are a number of other phenomena that are not explained within this framework: we describe stable oscillatory behaviour and coexistence of two defensive host types. We analyse the scenarios in which chick rejection may establish itself and give a first explanation as to why this defence trait has never been recorded in nature. We find that chick rejectors generally are at an intrinsic disadvantage with respect to a host type that rejects eggs. Hosts benefit more from rejecting cuckoo eggs than cuckoo chicks, and our model suggests that this is chiefly responsible for the absence of chick rejection. Moreover, even though it seems that chick rejection must be useful as an extra defence, it is shown that hosts with both defence strategies are less likely to establish themselves in competition with egg-rejectors than hosts which reject chicks only. These results provide insight in the extent to which adaptations may be perfected by natural selection.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12508530     DOI: 10.1006/bulm.2002.0311

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bull Math Biol        ISSN: 0092-8240            Impact factor:   1.758


  6 in total

1.  Why do house-hunting ants recruit in both directions?

Authors:  R Planqué; F-X Dechaume-Moncharmont; N R Franks; T Kovacs; J A R Marshall
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2007-08-03

2.  Collective defence portfolios of ant hosts shift with social parasite pressure.

Authors:  Evelien Jongepier; Isabelle Kleeberg; Sylwester Job; Susanne Foitzik
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2014-09-22       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Host genotype and age have no effect on rejection of parasitic eggs.

Authors:  Petr Procházka; Hana Konvičková-Patzenhauerová; Milica Požgayová; Alfréd Trnka; Václav Jelínek; Marcel Honza
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2014-04-10

4.  Experimental evidence for chick discrimination without recognition in a brood parasite host.

Authors:  Tomás Grim
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2007-02-07       Impact factor: 5.349

5.  Nest defenses and egg recognition of yellow-bellied prinia against cuckoo parasitism.

Authors:  Canchao Yang; Longwu Wang; Shun-Jen Cheng; Yu-Cheng Hsu; Wei Liang; Anders Pape Møller
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2014-07-11

6.  Ejecting chick cheats: a changing paradigm?

Authors:  Tomáš Grim
Journal:  Front Zool       Date:  2011-06-13       Impact factor: 3.172

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.