Functional traits determine heterospecific use of risk-related social information in forest birds of tropical South-East Asia

Abstract

In birds and mammals, mobbing calls constitute an important form of social information that can attract numerous sympatric species to localized mobbing aggregations. While such a response is thought to reduce the future predation risk for responding species, there is surprisingly little empirical evidence to support this hypothesis. One way to test the link between predation risk reduction and mobbing attraction involves testing the relationship between species’ attraction to mobbing calls and the functional traits that define their vulnerability to predation risk. Two important traits known to influence prey vulnerability include relative prey-to-predator body size ratio and the overlap in space use between predator and prey; in combination, these measures strongly influence prey accessibility, and therefore their vulnerability, to predators. Here, we combine community surveys with behavioral experiments of a diverse bird assemblage in the lowland rainforest of Sumatra to test whether the functional traits of body mass (representing body size) and foraging height (representing space use) can predict species’ attraction to heterospecific mobbing calls. At four forest sites along a gradient of forest degradation, we characterized the resident bird communities using point count and mist-netting surveys, and determined the species groups attracted to standardized playbacks of mobbing calls produced by five resident bird species of roughly similar body size and foraging height. We found that (1) a large, diverse subcommunity of bird species was attracted to the mobbing calls and (2) responding species (especially the most vigorous respondents) tended to be (a) small (b) mid-storey foragers (c) with similar trait values as the species producing the mobbing calls. Our findings from the relatively lesser known bird assemblages of tropical Asia add to the growing evidence for the ubiquity of heterospecific information networks in animal communities, and provide empirical support for the long-standing hypothesis that predation risk reduction is a major benefit of mobbing information networks.

References Altmann, S. A. (1956). Avian mobbing behavior and predator recognition. The Condor, 58, 241–253. van Balen, B. (2008). XC46912. Retrieved from www.xeno-canto.org/46912 Bērziņš, A., Krama, T., Krams, I., Freeberg, T. M., Kevleniece, I., Kullberg, C., & Rantala, M. J. (2010). Mobbing as a trade-off between safety and reproduction in a songbird. Behavioral Ecology, 21, 1054-1060. Brose, U., Jonsson, T., Berlow, E. L., Warren, P., Banasek-Richter, C., & Bersier, L. F. (2006). Consumer-resource body-size relationships in natural food webs. Ecology, 87, 2411–2417. Brown, J. S., Laundré, J. W., & Gurung, M. (1999). The ecology of fear: Optimal foraging, game theory, and trophic interactions. Journal of Mammalogy, 80, 385–399. Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. (2002) Model selection and multi-model inference. New York, NY, USA: Springer Press, pp. 496. Caro, T. (2005). Antipredator defenses in birds and mammals. Chicago, IL, USA.: University of Chicago Press. Chandler, C. R., & Rose, R. K. (1988). Comparative analysis of the effects of visual and auditory stimuli on avian mobbing behavior. Journal of Field Ornithology, 59, 269–277. Cohen, J. E., Pimm, S. L., Yodzis, P., & Saldaña, J. (1993). Body sizes of animal predators and animal prey in food webs. Journal of Animal Ecology, 62, 67–78. Dall, S. R. X., Giraldeau, L. A., Olsson, O., McNamara, J. M., & Stephens, D. W. (2005). Information and its use by animals in evolutionary ecology. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 20, 187–193. Danchin, E., Giraldeau, L. A., Valone, T. J., & Wagner, R. H. (2004). Public information: From nosy neighbors to cultural evolution. Science, 305, 487–491. Dugatkin, L. A., & Godin, J. G. J. (1992). Prey approaching predators: A cost-benefit perspective. Annales Zoologici Fennici, 29, 233–252. Ekman, J. (1986). Tree use and predator vulnerability of wintering passerines. Ornis Scandinavica, 17, 261–267. Ferguson-Lees, J., & Christie, D. A. (2001) Raptors of the world. New York, NY, USA.: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Forsman, J. T., & Mönkkönen, M. (2001). Responses by breeding birds to heterospecific song and mobbing call playbacks under varying predation risk. Animal Behaviour, 62, 1067–1073. Forsman, J. T., Thomson, R. L., & Seppänen, J. T. (2007). Mechanisms and fitness effects of interspecific information use between migrant and resident birds. Behavioral Ecology, 18, 888–894. Goodale, E., & Kotagama, S. W. (2008). Response to conspecific and heterospecific alarm calls in mixed-species bird flocks of a Sri Lankan rainforest. Behavioral Ecology, 19, 887–894. Graw, B., & Manser, M. B. (2007). The function of mobbing in cooperative meerkats. Animal Behaviour, 74, 507–517. Hetrick, S. A., & Sieving, K. E. (2012). Antipredator calls of tufted titmice and interspecific transfer of encoded threat information. Behavioral Ecology, 23, 83–92. del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A., & Christie, D. (1992–2013) Handbook of the birds of the world. Barcelona, Spain: Lynx Edicions. Hua, F., Marthy, W., Lee, D., & Janra, M. N. (2011). Globally threatened Sunda Blue Flycatcher Cyornis caerulatus: Synthesis of global records and recent records from Sumatra. Forktail, 27, 83–85. Hua, F., & Sieving, K. E. (2016). Understory avifauna exhibits altered mobbing behavior in tropical forest degraded by selective logging. Oecologia, 182, 743–754. Hurd, C. R. (1996). Interspecific attraction to the mobbing calls of black-capped chickadees (Parus atricapillus). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 38, 287–292. Klecka, J., & Boukal, D. S. (2013). Foraging and vulnerability traits modify predator-prey body mass allometry: Freshwater macroinvertebrates as a case study. Journal of Animal Ecology, 82, 1031–1041. Kroodsma, D. E., Byers, B. E., Goodale, E., Johnson, S., & Liu, W. C. (2001). Pseudoreplication in playback experiments, revisited a decade later. Animal Behaviour, 61, 1029–1033. Lima, S. L. (1993). Ecological and evolutionary persepctives on escape from predatory attacks: A survey of North American birds. The Wilson Bulletin, 105, 1–47. Magrath, R. D., Haff, T. M., Fallow, P. M., & Radford, A. N. (2015). Eavesdropping on heterospecific alarm calls: From mechanisms to consequences. Biological Reviews, 90, 560–586. Martínez, A. E., Gomez, J. P., Ponciano, J. M., & Robinson, S. K. (2016). Functional traits, flocking propensity, and perceived predation risk in an Amazonian understory bird community. Amarican Naturalist, 187, 607–619. Morris, S., & Hyun, S. S. (2002). Social value of public information. The American Economic Review, 92, 1521–1534. O'Brien, T. G., & Kinnaird, M. F. (1996). Birds and mammals of the Bukit Barisan Selatan National Park, Sumatra, Indonesia. Oryx, 30, 207–217. Pearson, D. L. (1971). Vertical stratification of birds in a tropical dry forest. The Condor, 73, 46–55. R Core Team (2015). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org Reynolds, R. T., Scott, J. M., & Nussbaum, R. A. (1980). A variable circular-plot method for estimating bird numbers. Condor, 82, 309–313. Schmidt, K. A., Dall, S. R. X., & van Gils, J. A. (2010). The ecology of information: An overview on the ecological significance of making informed decisions. Oikos, 119, 304–316. Seppänen, J. T., Forsman, J. T., Mönkkönen, M., & Thomson, R. L. (2007). Social information use is a process across time, space, and ecology, reaching heterospecifics. Ecology, 88, 1622–1633. Shultz, S. (2001). Notes on interactions between monkeys and African crowned eagles in Taï National Park, Ivory Coast. Folia Primatologica, 72, 248–250. Sieving, K. E., Contreras, T. A., & Maute, K. L. (2004). Heterospecific facilitation of forest-boundary crossing by mobbing understory birds in north-central florida. Auk, 121, 738–751. Sieving, K. E., Hetrick, S. A., & Avery, M. L. (2010). The versatility of graded acoustic measures in classification of predation threats by the tufted titmouse Baeolophus bicolor: Exploring a mixed framework for threat communication. Oikos, 119, 264–276. Sridhar, H., Srinivasan, U., Askins, R. A., Canales-Delgadillo, J. C., Chen, C. C., Ewert, D. N., ··· Shanker, K. (2012). Positive relationships between association strength and phenotypic similarity characterize the assembly of mixed-species bird flocks worldwide. The American naturalist, 180, 777–790. Templeton, C. N., & Greene, E. (2007). Nuthatches eavesdrop on variations in heterospecific chickadee mobbing alarm calls. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104, 5479–5482. Templeton, C. N., Greene, E., & Davis, K. (2005). Allometry of alarm calls: Black-capped chicakdees encode information about predator size. Science, 308, 1934–1937. Walther, B. A. (2002). Grounded ground birds and suffering canopy birds: Variation of foraging stratum breadth observed in neotropical forest birds and tested with simulation models using boundary constraints. The Auk, 119, 658–675. Whitman, A. A., Hagan, J. M. III, & Brokaw, V. L. (1997). A comparison of two bird survey techniques used in a subtropical forest. The Condor, 99, 955–965. Wilman, H., Belmaker, J., Jennifer, S., de la Rosa, C., Rivadeneira, M. M., & Jetz, W. (2014). EltonTraits 1. 0: Species-level foraging attributes of the world ‘s birds and mammals. Ecology, 95, 2027. Zuberbühler, K. (2009). Chapter 8 survivor signals. The biology and psychology of animal alarm calling. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 40, 277–322.