Advertisement

Cognitive Decision Rules for Egg Rejection

  • Thomas Manna
  • Csaba Moskát
  • Mark E. Hauber
Chapter
Part of the Fascinating Life Sciences book series (FLS)

Abstract

Egg rejection is the best studied behavioral adaptation by hosts to avian brood parasitism. Investigations of the mechanism(s) by which a host accomplishes the task of perceiving and deciding to reject a foreign egg have been a hotbed of debate and discovery for decades. The two most often tested cognitive explanations for this behavior are: (1) the host rejects the egg most dissimilar from the other eggs in the nest (discordancy mechanism) and (2) the host compares each egg to an internal template of the appearance of its own eggs (template recognition mechanism). While many years of published work have purported sole support for the template recognition hypothesis (for instance, hosts can experimentally reject foreign eggs which do not represent a quantitative minority in the clutch), in recent years an increasingly prevalent argument that the two mechanisms are working in tandem has come to light. Furthermore, there is also a steadily building body of work indicating that hosts have plastic discrimination thresholds, such that the extent to which parasitic eggs must be different from a host’s own egg before rejection occurs appears to be both socio-ecological context dependent and shaped by earlier experiences through a learning component. Overall, the cognitive architecture of egg rejection decisions appears to be complex and shaped by the particular coevolutionary histories of hosts and parasites.

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank M. Soler for his invitation to contribute this chapter. We also thank Eivin Røskaft, Francisco Ruiz-Raya, and Manolo Soler for their comments on the manuscript. For financial support, we thank the Human Frontier Science Program and the National Science Foundation (to MEH). This study was also supported by the National Research, Development and Innovation Office (NKFIH, NN118194 to CM).

References

  1. Bán M, Moskát C, Barta Z, Hauber ME (2013) Simultaneous viewing of own and parasitic eggs is not required for egg rejection by a cuckoo host. Behav Ecol 24:1014–1021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bártol I, Karcza Z, Moskát C, Røskaft E, Kisbenedek T (2002) Responses of great reed warblers Acrocephalus arundinaceus to experimental brood parasitism: the effects of a cuckoo Cuculus canorus dummy and egg mimicry. J Avian Biol 33:420–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brooke MDL, Davies NB (1988) Egg mimicry by cuckoos Cuculus canorus in relation to discrimination by hosts. Nature 335:630–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cherry MI, Bennett ATD, Moskát C (2007) Host intra-clutch variation, cuckoo egg matching and egg rejection by great reed warblers. Naturwissenschaften 94:441–447CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Davies NB (2000) Cuckoos, cowbirds and other cheats. T & AD Poyser, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Feeney WE, Welbergen JA, Langmore NE (2014) Advances in the study of coevolution between avian brood parasites and their hosts. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 45:227–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hanley D, Samas P, Hauber ME, Grim T (2015) Who moved my eggs? An experimental test of the egg arrangement hypothesis for the rejection of brood parasitic eggs. Anim Cogn 18:299–305CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Hauber ME (2001) Site selection and repeatability in brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater) parasitism of eastern phoebe (Sayornis phoebe) nests. Can J Zool 79:1518–1523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hauber ME, Sherman PW (2001) Self-referent phenotype matching: theoretical considerations and empirical evidence. Trends Neurosci 24:609–616CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Hauber ME, Moskát C, Bán M (2006) Experimental shift in hosts’ acceptance threshold of inaccurate-mimic brood parasite eggs. Biol Lett 2:177–180CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Hauber ME, Samaš P, Anderson MG, Rutila J, Low J, Cassey P, Grim T (2014) Life-history theory predicts host behavioural responses to experimental brood parasitism. Ethol Ecol Evol 26:349–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hauber ME, Tong L, Bán M, Croston R, Grim T, Waterhouse GIN, Shawkey MD, Barron AD, Moskát C (2015) The value of artificial stimuli in behavioral research: making the case for egg rejection studies in avian brood parasitism. Ethology 121:521–528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Honza M, Požgayová M, Procházka P, Tkadlec E (2007) Consistency in egg rejection behaviour: responses to repeated brood parasitism in the blackcap (Sylvia atricapilla). Ethology 113:344–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Krüger O (2011) Brood parasitism selects for no defence in a cuckoo host. Proc Biol Sci 278:2777–2783CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Lahti DC, Lahti AR (2002) How precise is egg discrimination in weaverbirds? Anim Behav 63:1135–1142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lang AK, Bollinger EK, Peer BD (2014) Effect of parasite-to-host egg ratio on egg rejection by a brown-headed cowbird host. Auk 131:694–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lotem A, Nakamura H, Zahavi A (1995) Constraints on egg discrimination and cuckoo-host co-evolution. Anim Behav 49:1185–1209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lyon B (2007) Mechanism of egg recognition in defenses against conspecific brood parasitism: American coots (Fulica americana) know their own eggs. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 61:455–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Marchetti K (2000) Egg rejection in a passerine bird: size does matter. Anim Behav 59:877–883CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. McLean IG (1987) Response to a dangerous enemy: should a brood parasite be mobbed? Ethology 75:235–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Moksnes A (1992) Egg recognition in chaffinches and bramblings. Anim Behav 44:993–995CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Molina-Morales M, Martínez JG, Martín-Gálvez D, Dawson D, Burke T, Aviles JM (2014) Cuckoo hosts shift from accepting to rejecting parasitic eggs across their lifetime. Evolution 68:3020–3029CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Moskát C, Hauber ME (2007) Conflict between egg recognition and egg rejection decisions in common cuckoo (Cuculus canorus) hosts. Anim Cogn 10:377–386CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Moskát C, Hauber ME, Avilés JM, Bán M, Hargitai R, Honza M (2009) Increased host tolerance of multiple cuckoo eggs leads to higher fledging success of the brood parasite. Anim Behav 77:1281–1290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Moskát C, Bán M, Székely T, Komdeur J, Lucassen RWG, van Boheemen LA, Hauber ME (2010) Discordancy or template-based recognition? Dissecting the cognitive basis of the rejection of foreign eggs in hosts of avian brood parasites. J Exp Biol 213:1976–1983CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Moskát C, Bán M, Hauber ME (2014a) Naïve hosts of avian brood parasites accept foreign eggs, whereas older hosts fine-tune foreign egg discrimination during laying. Front Zool 11:45CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Moskát C, Hauber ME, Elek Z, Gommers M, Bán M, Groenewoud F, Versluijs TSL, Hoetz CWA, Komdeur J (2014b) Foreign egg retention by avian hosts in repeated brood parasitism: why do rejecters accept? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 68:403–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Moskát C, Zölei A, Bán M, Elek Z, Tong L, Geltsch N, Hauber ME (2014c) How to spot a stranger’s egg? A mimicry-specific discordancy effect in the recognition of parasitic eggs. Ethology 120:616–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Peer BD, Sealy SG (2001) Mechanism of egg recognition in the great-tailed grackle (Quiscalus mexicanus). Bird Behav 14:71–73Google Scholar
  30. Polačiková L, Takasu F, Stokke BG, Moksnes A, Røskaft E, Cassey P, Hauber ME, Grim T (2013) Egg arrangement in avian clutches covaries with the rejection of foreign eggs. Anim Cogn 16:819–828CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Reeve HK (1989) The evolution of conspecific acceptance thresholds. Am Nat 133:407–435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rothstein SI (1974) Mechanisms of avian egg recognition: possible learned and innate factors. Auk 91:796–807CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rothstein SI (1975) Mechanisms of avian egg-recognition: do birds know their own eggs? Anim Behav 23:268–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rothstein SI (1990) A model system for coevolution: avian brood parasitism. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 21:481–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sealy SG, Bazin RC (1995) Low frequency of observed cowbird parasitism on eastern kingbirds: host rejection, effective nest defense, or parasite avoidance? Behav Ecol 6:140–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Servedio MR, Hauber ME (2006) To eject or to abandon? Life history traits of hosts and parasites interact to influence the fitness payoffs of alternative anti-parasite strategies. J Evol Biol 19:1585–1594CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Stevens M, Troscianko J, Spottiswoode CN (2013) Repeated targeting of the same hosts by a brood parasite compromises host egg rejection. Nat Commun 4:2475CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. Stoddard MC, Kilner RM, Town C (2014) Pattern recognition algorithm reveals how birds evolve individual egg pattern signatures. Nat Commun 5:4117CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Stokke BG, Takasu F, Moksnes A, Røskaft E (2007) The importance of clutch characteristics and learning for antiparasite adaptations in hosts of avian brood parasites. Evolution 61:2212–2228CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Strausberger BM, Rothstein SI (2009) Parasitic cowbirds may defeat host defense by causing rejecters to misimprint on cowbird eggs. Behav Ecol 20:691–699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Victoria JK (1972) Clutch characteristics and egg discriminative ability of the African village weaverbird Ploceus cucullatus. Ibis 114:367–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wang L, Yang C, Møller AP, Liang W, Lu X (2015) Multiple mechanisms of egg recognition in a cuckoo host. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 69:1761–1767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Welbergen JA, Davies NB (2009) Strategic variation in mobbing as a front line of defense against brood parasitism. Curr Biol 19:235–240CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Yang C, Cai Y, Liang W (2013) Eggs mimicry of common cuckoo (Cuculus canorus) utilizing ashy-throated parrotbill (Paradoxornis alphonsianus) host. Chin Birds 4:51–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Yang C, Møller AP, Røskaft E, Moksnes A, Liang W, Stokke BG (2014) Reject the odd egg: egg recognition mechanisms in parrotbills. Behav Ecol 25:1320–1324CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Psychology, Hunter College and the Graduate CenterCity University of New YorkNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.MTA-ELTE-MTM Ecology Research Group, A Joint Research Group of the Hungarian Academy of SciencesThe Biological Institute of the Eötvös Loránd University and the Hungarian Natural History MuseumBudapestHungary
  3. 3.Department of Animal Biology, School of Integrative BiologyUniversity of IllinoisUrbana-ChampaignUSA

Personalised recommendations