Behavioral Ecology Advance Access originally published online on August 18, 2004
Behavioral Ecology 2005 16(1):96-105; doi:10.1093/beheco/arh136
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The heterospecific habitat copying hypothesis: can competitors indicate habitat quality?
a Laboratoire de Fonctionnement et Évolution des Systèmes Écologiques, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, CNRS-UMR 7625, Paris, France, b Cátedra de Biología y Etología, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad de Extremadura, 10071 Cáceres, Spain, c Laboratoire d'Écologie Évolutive Parasitaire, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, CNRS-UMR 7103, Paris, France, and d Estación Experimental de Zonas Áridas, C.S.I.C., c/ General Segura 1, 04001, Almería, Spain
Address correspondence to D. Parejo. E-mail: dparejo{at}unex.es.
According to the "habitat copying" hypothesis, animals use the reproductive performance of conspecifics to assess habitat suitability and choose their future breeding site. This is because conspecifics share ecological needs and thus indicate habitat suitability. Here, we propose the "heterospecific habitat copying" hypothesis, which states that animals should use public information (i.e., information derived from the performance of others) from con- and heterospecifics sharing ecological needs. In a correlational approach we test some assumptions and predictions of this hypothesis with a data set from two sympatric bird populations, rollers (Coracias garrulus) and kestrels (Falco tinnunculus), using the same nest-boxes and exploiting similar food resources. Since kestrels are residents and breed earlier, we assumed that they are dominant over rollers for nest-box acquisition. The environment appears to be patchy for both species and temporally predictable for kestrels only. Two results suggest that the use of heterospecific public information in breeding habitat selection may be at work: (1) an increase in the reoccupancy probability by kestrels of previous roller nests with increasing nest success, and (2) an increase in roller breeding population with increasing local kestrel success. Most of the other observed patterns could be explained by alternative mechanisms such as natal philopatry, breeding fidelity, conspecific attraction, intraspecific habitat copying, and the effect of interspecific competition.
Key words: breeding habitat selection, conspecific cueing, habitat copying, heterospecific cueing.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. T. Forsman, M. B. Hjernquist, J. Taipale, and L. Gustafsson Competitor density cues for habitat quality facilitating habitat selection and investment decisions Behav. Ecol., February 19, 2008; (2008) arn005v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. T. Forsman, R. L. Thomson, and J.-T. Seppanen Mechanisms and fitness effects of interspecific information use between migrant and resident birds Behav. Ecol., September 1, 2007; 18(5): 888 - 894. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. E. Roberts and R. L. Goldstone EPICURE: Spatial and Knowledge Limitations in Group Foraging Adaptive Behavior, December 1, 2006; 14(4): 291 - 313. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|