Territorial behavior of the orange-tufted sunbird (Nectarinia osea Bonaparte) was studied in a suburb of Tel Aviv. Both male and female orange-tufted sunbirds occupied and guarded their territory throughout the year, but did so at different intensities in relation to season and fertility stages. When they were in the territory, both sexes spent most of their time at its center, and more so during the breeding season. Throughout the year, males tended to perch in exposed locations, while females spent 90% of their time in concealed locations. Males were also much more vocal than females, and during the breeding season they sang from high places, which females never did. It is suggested that occupying a territory during autumn may increase the chances of the territory’s owners continuing to occupy it during the breeding season.
Territories were also defended and advertised during the breeding season, with the female fertility stage having a significant effect on the behavior of her male partner, whose presence in the territory and occupancy of its center and exposed locations reached their peak. Male vocality, particularly singing rate, also reached its peak during the fertility stage, and decreased thereafter. These behaviors may indicate that during the pre-fertility and fertility stages, males guard their females, presumably in an attempt to prevent extra-pair copulations. On the other hand, the distance between male and female did not change in relation to the female fertility stage, and when resident males were removed, intrusion by non-resident females was higher than by males. These results suggest that territorial behavior during the breeding season functions to defend territory against male and female floaters.
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
Birkhead, T.R., M�ller, A.P. 1992. Sperm competition in birds: evolutionary causes and consequences. Academic Press, London.
M�ller, A.P. 1992. Relative size of avian breeding territories and the risk of cuckoldry. Anim. Behav. 43: 860–861.
M�ller, A.P. 1990. Changes in the size of avian breeding territories in relation to the nesting cycle. Anim. Behav. 40: 1070–1079.
Eberhard, J.R., Ewald, P. W. 1994. Food availability, intrusion pressure and territory size: an experimental study of Anna’s hummingbirds (Calypte anna). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 34: 11–18.
Sundberg, J. 1992. Absence of mate guarding in the yellowhammer (Emberiza citrinella). Ethology 92: 242–256.
Zilberman, R., Moav, B., Yom-Tov, Y. 1999. Extra-pair copulations in the socially monogamous orange-tufted sunbird. Isr. J. Zool. 45: 407–421.
Brown, J.H., Orians, G. 1970. Spacing patterns in mobile animals. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 1: 239– 262.
Gill, F.B., Wolf, L.L. 1975. Economics of feeding territoriality in the golden-winged sunbird. Ecology 56: 333–345.
Goldstein, H., Verbeek, N.A.M., Eisikovitz, D., Yom-Tov, Y. 1987. Sunbirds prefer to feed in the sun. Ardea 75: 293–295.
Sheldon, B.C. 1994. Timing and use of paternity guards by male chaffinches. Behaviour 129: 79–98.
Burley, N. 1988. Wild zebra finches have band-color preferences. Anim. Behav. 36: 1235–1237.
Nahari, N. 1980. Nectarinia osea—feeding behavior and its implication on its geographical expansion. M.Sc. thesis. Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv (in Hebrew, English summary).
Schoener, T.W. 1968. Sizes of feeding territories among birds. Ecology 49: 123–141.
Dunn, P.O. 1992. Do male birds adjust territory size to the risk of cuckoldry? Anim. Behav. 43: 857–859.
Goldstein, H., Yom-Tov, Y. 1988. Breeding biology of the orange-tufted sunbird in Israel. Ardea 76: 169–174.
Powers, D.R. 1987. Effects of variation in food quality on the breeding territoriality of the male Anna’s hummingbird. Condor 89: 103–111.
Perrins, C.M., Birkhead, T.R. 1983. Avian ecology. Blackie, London.
Hanski, I.K, Laurila, A. 1993. Male chaffinches do not enlarge their territories to prevent cuckoldry. Anim. Behav. 46: 1036–1038.
Zilberman, R., Leader, N., Moav, B., Yom-Tov, Y. 2001. Survival of the orange-tufted sunbird Nectarinia osea. Ostrich 72: 125–126.
Gass, C.L., Angehr, G., Canta, J. 1976. Regulation of food supply by feeding territoriality in the rufous hummingbird. Can. J. Zool. 54: 2046–2054.
Bjorklund, M., Westman, B. 1983. Extra-pair copulations in the pied flycatcher (Ficedula hypoleuca). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 13: 271–275.
M�ller, A.P. 1987. Mate guarding in the swallow Hirundo rustica. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 119–123.
Goldstein, H., Eisikovitz, D., Yom-Tov, Y. 1986. Infanticide in the Palestine sunbird. Condor 88: 528–529.
Zilberman, R. 1991. Extra-pair copulations in a sunbird population (Nectarinia osea osea) in Ramat-Aviv area. M.Sc. thesis. Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv (in Hebrew, English summary).
Kodrick-Brown, A., Brown, J. 1978. Influence of economics, interspecific competition and sexual dimorphism on territoriality of migrant rufous hummingbirds. Ecology 59: 285–296.
Bjorklund, M., M�ller, A.P., Sundberg, J., Westman, B. 1992. Female great tits, Parus major, avoid extra-pair copulation attempts. Anim. Behav. 43: 691–693.
Rodrigues, M. 1998. No relationship between territory size and the risk of cuckoldry in birds. Anim. Behav. 55: 915–923.
Dickinson, J.L. 1997. Male detention affects extra-pair copulation frequency and pair behavior in western bluebirds. Anim. Behav. 53: 561–571.
Sokal, R.R., Rohlf, F.J. 1995. Biometry. 3rd ed. W. H. Freeman, New York.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 224 | 36 | 7 |
| Full Text Views | 20 | 0 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 13 | 0 | 0 |
Territorial behavior of the orange-tufted sunbird (Nectarinia osea Bonaparte) was studied in a suburb of Tel Aviv. Both male and female orange-tufted sunbirds occupied and guarded their territory throughout the year, but did so at different intensities in relation to season and fertility stages. When they were in the territory, both sexes spent most of their time at its center, and more so during the breeding season. Throughout the year, males tended to perch in exposed locations, while females spent 90% of their time in concealed locations. Males were also much more vocal than females, and during the breeding season they sang from high places, which females never did. It is suggested that occupying a territory during autumn may increase the chances of the territory’s owners continuing to occupy it during the breeding season.
Territories were also defended and advertised during the breeding season, with the female fertility stage having a significant effect on the behavior of her male partner, whose presence in the territory and occupancy of its center and exposed locations reached their peak. Male vocality, particularly singing rate, also reached its peak during the fertility stage, and decreased thereafter. These behaviors may indicate that during the pre-fertility and fertility stages, males guard their females, presumably in an attempt to prevent extra-pair copulations. On the other hand, the distance between male and female did not change in relation to the female fertility stage, and when resident males were removed, intrusion by non-resident females was higher than by males. These results suggest that territorial behavior during the breeding season functions to defend territory against male and female floaters.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 224 | 36 | 7 |
| Full Text Views | 20 | 0 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 13 | 0 | 0 |