Skip Navigation


Behavioral Ecology Advance Access originally published online on July 14, 2004
Behavioral Ecology 2005 16(1):37-40; doi:10.1093/beheco/arh116
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Lay Summary
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
16/1/37    most recent
arh116v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (6)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Krama, T.
Right arrow Articles by Krams, I.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Krama, T.
Right arrow Articles by Krams, I.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Behavioral Ecology vol. 16 no. 1 © International Society for Behavioral Ecology 2005; all rights reserved.

Cost of mobbing call to breeding pied flycatcher, Ficedula hypoleuca

Tatjana Kramaa and Indrikis Kramsb

a Institute of Zoology and Hydrobiology, University of Tartu, 51014, Tartu, Estonia, and b Department of Biology, University of Daugavpils, LV-5400 Daugavpils, Latvia

Address correspondence to I. Krams. Email: krams{at}apollo.lv.

Mobbing signals advertise the location of a stalking predator to all prey in an area and recruit them into the inspection aggregation. Such behavior usually causes the predator to move to another area. However, mobbing calls could be eavesdropped by other predators. Because the predation cost of mobbing calls is poorly known, we investigated whether the vocalizations of the mobbing pied flycatcher, Ficedula hypoleuca, a small hole nesting passerine, increase the risk of nest predation. We used mobbing calls of pied flycatchers to examine if they could lure predators such as the marten, Martes martes. This predator usually hunts by night and may locate its mobbing prey while resting nearby during the day. Within each of 56 experimental plots, from the top of one nest-box we played back mobbing sounds of pied flycatchers, whereas blank tapes were played from the top of another nest-box. The trials with mobbing calls were carried out before sunset. We put pieces of recently abandoned nests of pied flycatchers and a quail, Coturnix coturnix, egg into each of the nest-boxes. Nest-boxes with playbacks of mobbing calls were depredated by martens significantly more than were nest-boxes with blank tapes. The results of the present study indicate that repeated conspicuous mobbing calls may carry a significant cost for birds during the breeding season.

Key words: antipredator behavior, Ficedula hypoleuca, mobbing calls, mobbing costs, pied flycatcher.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Proc R Soc BHome page
I. Krams, A. Berzins, T. Krama, D. Wheatcroft, K. Igaune, and M. J. Rantala
The increased risk of predation enhances cooperation
Proc R Soc B, October 21, 2009; (2009) rspb.2009.1614v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Behav EcolHome page
I. Krams, T. Krama, K. Igaune, and R. Mand
Long-lasting mobbing of the pied flycatcher increases the risk of nest predation
Behav. Ecol., November 1, 2007; 18(6): 1082 - 1084.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.