Food supply and provisioning behavior of parents: Are small hoopoe nestlings condemned to die?
Parents might use signals of need or of quality to decide food provisioning among their offspring, while the use of one or another signal might depend on food availability. Begging success of nestlings of different quality (i.e., body size) would also depend on food availability, and we here explore...
| Autores: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2023 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC) |
| Repositorio: | DIGITAL.CSIC. Repositorio Institucional del CSIC |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:digital.csic.es:10261/349059 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/10261/349059 https://api.elsevier.com/content/abstract/scopus_id/85177759591 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Upupa epops Food allocation Food availability Nestling size hierarchy Parent–offspring communication Social context |
| Sumario: | Parents might use signals of need or of quality to decide food provisioning among their offspring, while the use of one or another signal might depend on food availability. Begging success of nestlings of different quality (i.e., body size) would also depend on food availability, and we here explore the effect of experimental food supply in begging success of nestlings and in provisioning of female hoopoes (Upupa epops), a species with extreme hatching asynchrony and nestlings size hierarchy. We video-recorded food allocation of females, begging success of nestlings of different size, and the social context (i.e., the size category of the other nestlings that were begging for food) during periods when experimental food supply was or was not available in the same nests. We found that when experimental food supplementation was present, begging success of the intermediate, but not that of large or small-sized nestlings, increased. The experiment, however, did not affect the feeding preferences of females toward nestlings of different size. Moreover, when small nestlings were the only ones that were begging for food, their begging success decreased in the experimental period, and females used supplemented prey to feed themselves. Those results, on one hand, confirm the importance of food availability for the begging success of nestlings of particular sizes and, on the other, indicate that females prefer to use extra food for their own rather than for the smallest nestlings. We discuss possible mechanisms explaining the detected experimental effects and the adaptive and nonadaptive explanations of mothers ignoring the small nestlings. |
|---|