Nonrandom pattern of vigilance by preening black-headed gulls
In: BehaviourSearch for other papers by Ivana Novčić in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Zoran Vidović in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Mark E. Hauber in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
Classic models of vigilance assume instantaneous and sequential randomness in the scanning process, implying negative exponential distribution of interscan durations and no interdependence among successive interscans. We examined whether vigilance pattern by preening black-headed gulls, Chroicocephalus ridibundus, meets these assumptions. Out of 54 behavioural sequences, 50 departed from the expected negative exponential distribution, whereas the focal interscan duration was significantly affected by the interaction of the preceding scan and the interscan interval. These results reveal departures from randomness in the scanning process by gulls, which may be a consequence of the hunting strategies of their predators or due to the trade-off between the needs for feather maintenance and antipredator vigilance.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
Aiken, L.S. & West, S.G. (1991). Multiple regression: testing and interpreting interactions. — Sage Publications, London.
-
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B. & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. — J. Stat. Softw. 67: 1-48.
-
Beaman, M. & Madge, S. (2010). The handbook of bird identification: for Europe and the western Palearctic. — Christopher Helm, London.
-
Beauchamp, G. (2006). Nonrandom patterns of vigilance in flocks of the greater flamingo, Phoenicopterus ruber ruber. — Anim. Behav. 71: 593-598.
-
Beauchamp, G. (2014). Social predation: how group living benefits predators and prey. — Academic Press, London.
-
Beauchamp, G. (2015). Animal vigilance: monitoring predators and competitors. — Academic Press, Oxford.
-
Beauchamp, G. (2016). Function and structure of vigilance in a gregarious species exposed to threats from predators and conspecifics. — Anim. Behav. 116: 195-201.
-
Beauchamp, G. (2019). Can scalar timing explain variability in scanning patterns? — Behav. Process. 158: 85-88.
-
Beauchamp, G. (2020). Predator attack patterns influence vigilance in a virtual experiment. — Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 74: 1-9.
-
Bednekoff, P.A. & Lima, S.L. (1998). Randomness, chaos and confusion in the study of antipredator vigilance. — Trends Ecol. Evol. 13: 284-287.
-
Bednekoff, P.A. & Lima, S.L. (2002). Why are scanning patterns so variable? An overlooked question in the study of anti-predator vigilance. — J. Avian Biol. 33: 143-149.
-
Bertram, B.C. (1980). Vigilance and group size in ostriches. — Anim. Behav. 28: 278-286.
-
Bolker, B.M. (2015). Linear and generalized linear mixed models. — In: Ecological statistics: contemporary theory and application (Fox, G.A., Negrete-Yankelevich, S. & Sosa, V.J., eds). Oxford University Press, Oxford, p. 309-334.
-
Bush, S.E. & Clayton, D.H. (2018). Anti-parasite behaviour of birds. — Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 373: 20170196.
-
Chung, Y., Rabe-Hesketh, S., Dorie, V., Gelman, A. & Liu, J. (2013). A nondegenerate penalized likelihood estimator for variance parameters in multilevel models. — Psychometrika 78: 685-709.
-
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S.G. & Aiken, L.S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences, 3rd edn. — Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
-
Cotgreave, P. & Clayton, D.H. (1994). Comparative analysis of time spent grooming by birds in relation to parasite load. — Behaviour 131: 171-187.
-
Cresswell, W. & Quinn, J.L. (2010). Attack frequency, attack success and choice of prey group size for two predators with contrasting hunting strategies. — Anim. Behav. 80: 643-648.
-
Dominguez, J. & Vidal, M. (2007). Vigilance behaviour of preening black-tailed godwit Limosa limosa in roosting flocks. — Ardeola 54: 227-235.
-
Duffield, C. & Ioannou, C.C. (2017). Marginal predation: do encounter or confusion effects explain the targeting of prey group edges? — Behav. Ecol. 28: 1283-1292.
-
Evans, M.H., Lihou, K.L. & Rands, S.A. (2018). Black-headed gulls synchronise their activity with their nearest neighbours. — Sci. Rep. 8: 1-5.
-
Fox, J. & Weisberg, S. (2019). An R companion to applied regression, 3rd edn. — Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
-
Ge, C., Beauchamp, G. & Li, Z. (2011). Coordination and synchronisation of anti-predation vigilance in two crane species. — PLoS ONE 6: e26447.
-
Hamilton, W.D. (1971). Geometry for the selfish herd. — J. Theor. Biol. 31: 295-311.
-
Ieno, E.N. & Zuur, A.F. (2015). Beginner’s guide to data exploration and visualisation with R. — Highland Statistics, Newburgh.
-
Kašanin-Grubin, M., Štrbac, S., Antonijević, S., Mračević, S.D., Randjelović, D., Orlić, J. & Šajnović, A. (2019). Future environmental challenges of the urban protected area Great War Island (Belgrade, Serbia) based on valuation of the pollution status and ecosystem services. — J. Environ. Manage. 251: 109574.
-
Lendrem, D.W. (1983). Predation risk and vigilance in the blue tit (Parus caeruleus). — Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 14: 9-13.
-
Lendrem, D.W., Stretch, D., Metcalfe, N.B. & Jones, P. (1986). Scanning for predators in the purple sandpiper: a time dependent or time-independent process? — Anim. Behav. 34: 1577-1578.
-
Lenth, R.V. (2021). emmeans: estimated marginal means, aka least-squares means. — R package version 1.7.0. Available online at https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=emmeans.
-
Li, C., Beauchamp, G., Wang, Z. & Cui, P. (2016). Collective vigilance in the wintering hooded crane: the role of flock size and anthropogenic disturbances in a human-dominated landscape. — Ethology 122: 999-1008.
-
Li, Y., Yang, L., Luo, Y., Wu, Y. & Li, Z. (2018). Sequential vigilance is unpredictable in reproductive black-necked cranes. — Avian Res. 9: 1-7.
-
Li, Z., Wang, Z. & Ge, C. (2013). Time budgets of wintering red-crowned cranes: effects of habitat, age and family size. — Wetlands 33: 227-232.
-
Li, Z., Che, Y. & Yang, L. (2017). Can sequential vigilance be predicted? — Behav. Process. 145: 81-85.
-
Lima, S.L. (1987). Vigilance while feeding and its relation to the risk of predation. — J. Theor. Biol. 124: 303-316.
-
Lindsey, J.K. (2004). Statistical analysis of stochastic processes in time. — Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
-
Luo, D., Ganesh, S. & Koolaard, J. (2021). predictmeans: calculate predicted means for linear models. — R package version 1.0.6. Available online at https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=predictmeans.
-
Luo, Y., Wang, L., Yang, L., Wang, X., Tian, X. & Li, Z. (2020). Unpredictability of vigilance in two sympatric Tibetan ungulates. — Ethology 126: 883-889.
-
McCabe, C.J., Kim, D.S. & King, K.M. (2018). Improving present practices in the visual display of interactions. — AMPPS 1: 147-165.
-
McDonald, J.H. (2014). Handbook of biological statistics, 3rd edn. — Sparky House Publishing, Baltimore, MD.
-
Nadjafzadeh, M., Hofer, H. & Krone, O. (2016). Sit-and-wait for large prey: foraging strategy and prey choice of white-tailed eagles. — J. Ornithol. 157: 165-178.
-
Novack-Gottshall, P. & Wang, S.C. (2019). KScorrect: Lilliefors-corrected Kolmogorov–Smirnov Goodness-of-Fit Tests. — R package version 1.4.0. Available online at https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=KScorrect.
-
Novčić, I. & Vidović, Z. (2021). Nearest-neighbour distance, rather than group size, affects vigilance in urban flocks of preening black-headed gulls Chroicocephalus ridibundus. — Bird Stud. 68: 174-182.
-
Pays, O., Jarman, P.J., Loisel, P. & Gerard, J.F. (2007). Coordination, independence or synchronization of individual vigilance in the eastern grey kangaroo? — Anim. Behav. 73: 595-604.
-
Pays, O., Blomberg, S.P., Renaud, P.C., Favreau, F.R. & Jarman, P.J. (2010). How unpredictable is the individual scanning process in socially foraging mammals? — Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 64: 443-454.
-
Pulliam, H.R. (1973). On the advantages of flocking. — J. Theor. Biol. 38: 419-422.
-
R Core Team (2021). R: a language and environment for statistical computing. — R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, available online at http://www.R-project.org/.
-
Ruxton, G.D. & Roberts, G. (1999). Are vigilance sequences a consequence of intrinsic chaos or external changes? — Anim. Behav. 57: 493-495.
-
Scannell, J., Roberts, G. & Lazarus, J. (2001). Prey scan at random to evade observant predators. — Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 268: 541-547.
-
Sirot, E. & Pays, O. (2011). On the dynamics of predation risk perception for a vigilant forager. — J. Theor. Biol. 276: 1-7.
-
Studd, M., Montgomerie, R.D. & Robertson, R.J. (1983). Group size and predator surveillance in foraging house sparrows (Passer domesticus). — Can. J. Zool. 61: 226-231.
-
Wickham, H. (2016). ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. — Springer-Verlag, New York, NY.
-
Zuur, A.F., Ieno, E.N., Walker, N.J., Saveliev, A.A. & Smith, G.M. (2009). Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R. — Springer, New York, NY.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1060 | 217 | 20 |
| Full Text Views | 48 | 8 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 82 | 18 | 0 |
Nonrandom pattern of vigilance by preening black-headed gulls
In: BehaviourSearch for other papers by Ivana Novčić in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Zoran Vidović in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Mark E. Hauber in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
Classic models of vigilance assume instantaneous and sequential randomness in the scanning process, implying negative exponential distribution of interscan durations and no interdependence among successive interscans. We examined whether vigilance pattern by preening black-headed gulls, Chroicocephalus ridibundus, meets these assumptions. Out of 54 behavioural sequences, 50 departed from the expected negative exponential distribution, whereas the focal interscan duration was significantly affected by the interaction of the preceding scan and the interscan interval. These results reveal departures from randomness in the scanning process by gulls, which may be a consequence of the hunting strategies of their predators or due to the trade-off between the needs for feather maintenance and antipredator vigilance.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1060 | 217 | 20 |
| Full Text Views | 48 | 8 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 82 | 18 | 0 |
