| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Behavioral Ecology Vol. 12 No. 4: 506-511
© 2001 International Society for Behavioral Ecology
Forum |
On the cost of begging vocalization: implications of vigilance
Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, UK
Address correspondence to A. Roulin. E-mail: ra241@cam.ac.uk .
Received 1 June 2000; revised 15 August 2000; accepted 10 September 2000.
Begging vocalization is thought to have evolved as a consequence of the
parent-offspring conflict over parental investment
(Mock and Parker, 1997
). Under
this conflict, parents are reluctant to provide all the resources requested by
current offspring because they are saving resources for future broods
(Trivers, 1974). In this
scenario, begging has evolved as an honest signal of need with the most hungry
offspring begging most conspicuously. This information allows parents to
optimally adjust reproductive investment, since they can accurately assess
offspring food requirement (Godfray,
1991). Given the conflict of interest over resources between
parents and offspring, the evolutionary stability of begging would be ensured
by its cost for two reasons. First, the benefit of obtaining additional
resources from the parents increases with need, and hence the benefit to be
fed outweighs the cost of begging only when hungry. Second, if all offspring,
independent of need, were to
Predation cost
Punishment cost
Physical cost
The vigilance component of begging
Definition and assessment of the vigilance component of begging
Evidence that more vigilant nestlings are fed first
Is the vigilance component of begging costly?
Methodological consequences of vigilance for the study of the cost of
begging
Evolutionary consequences of vigilance
Conclusion
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
REFERENCES
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  R. A. Johnstone and A. Roulin Sibling negotiation Behav. Ecol., November 1, 2003; 14(6): 780 - 786. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Neuenschwander, M. W. G. Brinkhof, M. Kolliker, and H. Richner Brood size, sibling competition, and the cost of begging in great tits (Parus major) Behav. Ecol., July 1, 2003; 14(4): 457 - 462. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|