| 1. |
- Mills, James A., et al.
(författare)
-
Archiving Primary Data : Solutions for Long-Term Studies
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Trends in Ecology & Evolution. - : Elsevier BV. - 0169-5347 .- 1872-8383. ; 30:10, s. 581-589
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The recent trend for journals to require open access to primary data included in publications has been embraced by many biologists, but has caused apprehension amongst researchers engaged in long-term ecological and evolutionary studies. A worldwide survey of 73 principal investigators (PIs) with long-term studies revealed positive attitudes towards sharing data with the agreement or involvement of the PI, and 93% of PIs have historically shared data. Only 8% were in favor of uncontrolled, open access to primary data while 63% expressed serious concern. We present here their viewpoint on an issue that can have non-trivial scientific consequences. We discuss potential costs of public data archiving and provide possible solutions to meet the needs of journals and researchers.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Barnaby, Jonathan, 1965-, et al.
(författare)
-
The role of nepotism, cooperation, and competition in the avian families
- 2010
-
Bok (refereegranskat)abstract
- A large number of bird species live in stable groups, and this sets the scene for complex social behaviours, such as cooperative breeding. The vast majority of groups consist of families which arise when young postpone dispersal and remain with their parents beyond independence. However, the factors selecting for the evolution of families and thus also cooperative breeding among birds, are still a challenging puzzle. The currently accepted key explanation for the evolution of families and cooperative breeding focuses on dispersal constraints. While constraints successfully explain within‐population dispersal decisions, they fail as an ultimate explanation because offspring in the majority of species face some sort of dispersal constraint, yet still disperse promptly. Recent alternative explanations focus on the role of philopatry and nepotism, and emphasise a key role of life‐history for the evolution of families. Phylogenetic analyses and field studies have indicated that living in family groups is far more widespread among long‐lived species than short‐lived ones. A long lifespan gives parents the opportunity to invest in their offspring for a prolonged period, while this option is less viable for short‐lived species. Thus, living with nepotistic parents provides offspring with direct fitness benefits that can select for the evolution of family living beyond independence. Nevertheless this generalisation is brought into question since many long‐lived bird species do not live in family groups. An alternative approach attempts to explain family living through the variation in territory quality. Here the incentive to remain with the parents is created by the availability of resources on the natal territory independent of parental nepotism. However, there is not only cooperation, conflicts are also common place in families. Living with independent, sexually mature offspring can lead to conflicts through a change in resource availability or the death of aparent. Therefore families can be expected to be dynamic societies where both parent and offspring decisions depend on each other, and family maintenance depends upon the current ecological conditions. Based on this background, here we review recent studies that have investigated the processes that facilitate family formation, and which highlight both cooperation and conflict that arises from living in family groups. We examine the strengths of current models and explore ideas for a more coherent framework in which to understand prolonged family association in birds. We argue that two paths lead to family living, depending on the life-history. In medium-short lived species where the postponement of independent reproduction comes at a high cost, offspring can benefit from an association with their parents until the next breeding season. In longer-lived species, offspring actually benefit from postponing the onset of independent reproduction, making family living beyond the first year of life an adaptive strategy, and giving the option for cooperative breeding. These processes are illustrated by 5 species-specific case studies. We then finally suggest a number of key questions to developing a deeper understanding of the evolution of family living in birds.
|
|
| 5. |
- Covas, R, et al.
(författare)
-
Life history and the evolution of family living in birds
- 2007
-
Ingår i: Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Biological Sciences. - : The Royal Society. - 0962-8452 .- 1471-2954. ; 274:1616, s. 1349-1357
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- The reason why some bird species live in family groups is an important question of evolutionary biology that remains unanswered. Families arise when young delay the onset of independent reproduction and remain with their parents beyond independence. Explanations for why individuals forgo independent reproduction have hitherto focused on dispersal constraints, such as the absence of high-quality breeding openings. However, while constraints successfully explain within-population dispersal decisions, they fail as an ultimate explanation for variation in family formation across species. Most family-living species are long-lived and recent life-history studies demonstrated that a delayed onset of reproduction can be adaptive in long-lived species. Hence, delayed dispersal and reproduction might be an adaptive life-history decision rather than ‘the best of a bad job’. Here, we attempt to provide a predictive framework for the evolution of families by integrating life-history theory into family formation theory. We suggest that longevity favours a delayed onset of reproduction and gives parents the opportunity of a prolonged investment in offspring, an option which is not available for short-lived species. Yet, parents should only prolong their investment in offspring if this increases offspring survival and outweighs the fitness cost that parents incur, which is only possible under ecological conditions, such as a predictable access to resources. We therefore propose that both life-history and ecological factors play a role in determining the evolution of family living across species, yet we suggest different mechanisms than those proposed by previous models.
|
|
| 6. |
- Cunha, Filipe C. R., et al.
(författare)
-
Who do you trust? : Wild birds use social knowledge to avoid being deceived
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Science Advances. - : American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). - 2375-2548. ; 7:22
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Many species give deceptive warning calls, enabled by the high risk of ignoring them. In Siberian jays, a territorial, group-living bird, individuals give warning calls toward perched predators and mob them. However, intruding neighbors can emit these warning calls in the absence of predators to access food, but breeders often ignore these calls. Playback field experiments show that breeders flee sooner and return later after warning calls of former group members than those of neighbors or unknown individuals. Thus, breeders respond appropriately only to warning calls of previous cooperation partners. This mechanism facilitates the evolution and maintenance of communication vulnerable to deceptive signaling. This conclusion also applies to human language because of its cooperative nature and thus, its vulnerability to deception.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Eggers, Sonke, et al.
(författare)
-
Predator-induced reductions in nest visitation rates are modified by forest cover and food availability
- 2008
-
Ingår i: Behavioral Ecology. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1045-2249 .- 1465-7279. ; 19:5, s. 1056-1062
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Bird parents can alert predators to the location of their nest. One mitigating option is that parents reduce their nest visitation rate in exchange for a lower predation risk. Here, using field data and experiments, we show that Siberian jay Perisoreus infaustus parents adjust feeding visit rates depending on an interaction of 3 factors: predator activity, nest concealment, and food availability. The rate of nest visits increased with the degree of nest concealment; yet, this relationship was modified by the presence of corvid predators. As the vegetation became more dense, parents at sites with high corvid activity disproportionately increased their feeding visit rates when compared with birds at sites with low corvid activity. We experimentally assessed how nesting cover affects this response of parents to the presence of corvids by using an Eurasian jay Garrulus glandarius model. Parents nesting at open sites ceased nest visits, whereas those nesting in dense forest continued feeding, albeit at a lower rate. Cover may thus not fully compensate for the effect of predator activity on feeding visit rates. However, offspring exposed to high predator activity might still receive the same amount of food because parents may adjust load sizes to compensate. This idea was confirmed by an experiment showing that in areas of high predator activity, food-supplemented birds significantly decreased nest visits when compared with nonsupplemented birds. These results indicate that some bird species can employ multiple nest-defense strategies to reduce predator-attracting nest visits; yet, these strategies may carry fitness consequences through reduced offspring quality.
|
|
