Skip Navigation


Behavioral Ecology Advance Access originally published online on September 12, 2006
Behavioral Ecology 2006 17(6):1046-1056; doi:10.1093/beheco/arl044
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Lay Summary
Right arrowOA All Versions of this Article:
17/6/1046    most recent
arl044v1
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
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Møller, A. P.
Right arrow Articles by Erritzøe, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Møller, A. P.
Right arrow Articles by Erritzøe, J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 2006 The Authors
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/uk/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Losing the last feather: feather loss as an antipredator adaptation in birds

Anders Pape Møllera, Jan Tøttrup Nielsenb and Johannes Erritzøec

a Laboratoire de Parasitologie Evolutive, CNRS UMR 7103, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Bât. A, 7ème étage, 7 quai St Bernard, Case 237, F-75252 Paris Cedex 05, France b Espedal 4, Tolne, DK-9870 Sindal, Denmark c Taps Old Rectory, DK-6040 Christiansfeld, Denmark

Address correspondence to A.P. Møller. E-mail: amoller{at}snv.jussieu.fr.

Birds often lose feathers during predation attempts, and this ability has evolved as a means of escape. Because predators are more likely to grab feathers on the rump and the back than on the ventral side of an escaping bird, we predicted that the former feathers would have evolved to be relatively loosely attached as an antipredator strategy in species that frequently die from predation. We estimated the force required to remove feathers from the rump, back, and breast by pulling feathers with a spring balance from a range of European bird species in an attempt to investigate ecological factors associated with ease of feather loss during predation attempts. The force required to loosen a feather from the rump was less than that required to loosen a feather from back, which in turn was less than that required to loosen a feather from the breast. The relative force needed to loosen rump feathers compared with feathers from the back and the breast was smaller for prey species preferred by the most common predator of small passerine birds, the sparrowhawk Accipiter nisus. Likewise, the relative force was also smaller in species with a high frequency of complete tail loss among free-living birds, which we used as an index of the frequency of failed predation attempts. The relative force required to remove feathers from the rump was smaller in species with a high frequency of fear screams, another measure of the relative importance of predation as a cause of death. Feather loss required particularly little force among solitarily breeding bird species that suffer the highest degree of predation. Antipredator defense in terms of force required to remove feathers from the rump was larger in species with a strong antiparasite defense in terms of T-cell–mediated immune response. These findings are consistent with the hypothesis that different defenses are antagonistic and that they are traded off against each other.

Key words: alternative defense strategies, antagonistic defenses, immune defense, sociality.


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




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.