Abstract
Abstract
Background
Parental care benefits the offspring, but comes at a cost for each parent, which in biparental species gives rise to a conflict between partners regarding the within-pair distribution of care. Pair members could avoid exploitation by efficiently keeping track of each other’s efforts and coordinating their efforts. Parents may, therefore, space their presence at the nest, which could also allow for permanent protection of the offspring. Additionally, they may respond to their partner’s previous investment by co-adjusting their efforts on a trip-to-trip basis, resulting in overall similar parental activities within pairs.
Methods
We investigated the coordination of parental care measured as nest attendance and foraging effort in the Lesser black-backed gull (Larus fuscus), a species with long nest bouts that performs extended foraging trips out of sight of their partner. This was achieved by GPS-tracking both pair members simultaneously during the entire chick rearing period.
Results
We found that the timing of foraging trips (and hence nest attendance) was coordinated within gull pairs, as individuals left the colony only after their partner had returned. Parents did not match their partner’s investment by actively co-adjusting their foraging efforts on a trip-by-trip basis. Yet, pair members were similar in their temporal and energetic investments during chick rearing.
Conclusion
Balanced investment levels over a longer time frame suggest that a coordination of effort may not require permanent co-adjustment of the levels of care on a trip-to-trip basis, but may instead rather take place at an earlier stage in the reproductive attempt, or over integrated longer time intervals. Identifying the drivers and underlying processes of coordination will be one of the next necessary steps to fully understand parental cooperation in long-lived species.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
Reference95 articles.
1. Trivers RL. Parental investment and sexual selection. Sex Sel descent man. 1972.
2. Royle NJ, Hartley IR, Parker GA. Sexual conflict reduces offspring fitness in zebra finches. Nature. 2002;416:733–6.
3. Griffith SC. Cooperation and coordination in socially monogamous birds: moving away from a focus on sexual conflict. Front Ecol Evol. 2019;7:1–15.
4. Black JM. Pair bonds and partnerships. Oxford Ornithol Ser Oxford University Press. 1996;6:3–20.
5. Houston AI, Davies NB. The evolution of cooperation and life-history in the dunnock. Behav Ecol. 1985;471–87.
Cited by
9 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献