Skip Navigation


Behavioral Ecology Advance Access originally published online on July 12, 2006
Behavioral Ecology 2006 17(6):881-888; doi:10.1093/beheco/arl021
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
17/6/881    most recent
arl021v1
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 (7)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Piper, W. H.
Right arrow Articles by Banfield, N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Piper, W. H.
Right arrow Articles by Banfield, N.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Prospecting in a solitary breeder: chick production elicits territorial intrusions in common loons

Walter H. Pipera, Charles Walcottb, John N. Mager, IIIb, Margaret Peralac, Keren B. Tischlerd, Erin Harringtone, Amy J. Turcottef, Marc Schwabenlanderg and Nathan Banfieldh

a Department of Biological Sciences, Chapman University, Orange, CA 92866, USA b Department of Neurobiology and Behavior, Seeley Mudd Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA c Great Lakes Aquarium, 353 Harbor Drive, Duluth, MN 55802, USA d Department of Biological Sciences, Michigan Technological University, 1400 Townsend Drive, Dow 740, Houghton, MI 49931, USA e School of Natural Resources and Environment, Dana Building, University of Michigan, 430 East University, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA f Frito-Lay, Inc., Research Specialist, 4295 Tenderfoot Road, Rhinelander, WI 54501, USA g Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory, University of Minnesota, 1333 Gortner Avenue, St Paul, MN 55108, USA h Rainbow Circle, Montgomery City, MO 63361, USA

Address correspondence to W.H. Piper. E-mail: wpiper{at}chapman.edu.

In many species, young animals learn about various breeding patches in one year and use what they have learned to settle in a promising patch the next. Common loons (Gavia immer) seem good candidates for such prospecting as prebreeders and displaced breeders intrude frequently into breeding territories defended by monogamous pairs yet engage in no extrapair copulations. We tested 3 hypotheses for prospecting in loons. The permanent attributes hypothesis gained little support as we found no consistent differences in quality between territories and no physical or biotic trait that predicted reproductive success in a territory. We found some support for the conspecific attraction hypothesis as intruders were attracted to conspecifics in a lake in the short term; however, intrusions were not more frequent in territories that had experienced regular use by a pair the previous year than in territories that had previously been vacant. Instead, the increase in intrusion rate after a year of chick production supported the habitat-copying hypothesis, which states that floaters use the presence of chicks as a cue to target territories for future attempts at territorial takeover. Despite this system of prospecting, founding of new territories was common. One striking finding was the tendency of territorial breeders to conceal chicks from flying intruders, perhaps to avoid future territorial takeover.

Key words: common loon, floater, habitat copying, prospecting, territory.


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.