The effects of nesting stage, sex, and type of predator on parental defense by killdeer ( Charadrius vociferous ): testing models of avian parental defense
dc.contributor.author | Brunton, Dianne H. | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2006-09-11T18:20:06Z | |
dc.date.available | 2006-09-11T18:20:06Z | |
dc.date.issued | 1990-03 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Brunton, Dianne H.; (1990). "The effects of nesting stage, sex, and type of predator on parental defense by killdeer ( Charadrius vociferous ): testing models of avian parental defense." Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 26(3): 181-190. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/46896> | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 0340-5443 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 1432-0762 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/46896 | |
dc.description.abstract | Two models predicting the temporal patterns of parental investment in offspring defense over the nesting cycle were tested. The first is based on offspring age, the other on the vulnerability of offspring to predation. Both models make very similar predictions for altricial species after eggs have hatched, i.e., increases in intensity of parental defense until fledging. For precocial species, however, the post-hatching predictions of each model are different: the offspring age model predicts a continued increase in defense intensity, while the vulnerability model predicts a decline. I examined the temporal patterns of parental defense of a precocial shorebird, the killdeer ( Charadrius vociferus ), and determined which model was supported. Killdeer responses to human and natural predators were observed. Killdeer were less willing to leave the nest, responded most intensely, and displayed closest to a potential predator around hatching. Defense intensity increased from early to late incubation as predicted by the offspring age model. However, after hatching killdeer parental defense declined for both males and females, thus supporting the vulnerability model for this stage. Males and females responded significantly differently to all types of predators. Males took greater risks, remained on the nest longer, defended offspring more intensely, and displayed closer to the predator than females at the approach of a potential predator. Responses to natural predators depended on the type of predator and the approach made by the predator; a greater range of defense behavior was used for predators approaching on the ground compared to aerial predators. In general, killdeer responses to humans were more intense and less variable than their responses to natural predators. This was most likely because the human intruder approached nests and chicks more directly and closer than natural predators. | en_US |
dc.format.extent | 1036887 bytes | |
dc.format.extent | 3115 bytes | |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
dc.format.mimetype | text/plain | |
dc.language.iso | en_US | |
dc.publisher | Springer-Verlag | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Life Sciences | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Zoology | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Behavioural Sciences | en_US |
dc.title | The effects of nesting stage, sex, and type of predator on parental defense by killdeer ( Charadrius vociferous ): testing models of avian parental defense | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Ecology and Evolutionary Biology | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Science | en_US |
dc.description.peerreviewed | Peer Reviewed | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationum | School of Natural Resources, University of Michigan, 48109-1115, Ann Arbor, Michigan, MI, USA; Department of Biology, Yale University, OML, P.O. Box 6666, 06511-7444, New Haven, CT, USA | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationumcampus | Ann Arbor | en_US |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/46896/1/265_2004_Article_BF00172085.pdf | en_US |
dc.identifier.doi | http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00172085 | en_US |
dc.identifier.source | Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology | en_US |
dc.owningcollname | Interdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed |
Files in this item
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe its collections in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in them. We encourage you to Contact Us anonymously if you encounter harmful or problematic language in catalog records or finding aids. More information about our policies and practices is available at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.