4.4 Article

Effects of supplemental food on intra and inter-specific behaviour of the Varied Tit Parus varius

Journal

IBIS
Volume 142, Issue 2, Pages 312-319

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1474-919X.2000.tb04871.x

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Varied Tits Parus varius lived in flocks containing a pair, or a pair with one of. two unpaired birds. To test whether the sociality of Varied Tits or their participation in mixed-species flocks is sensitive to additional food (sunflower seeds), we compared the following parameters between fed and unfed periods at the individual level: population size, degree of site fidelity, mono-specific flock size and the stability of its membership, home-range size and distribution, attendance rate with mixed-species flocks, and Flock size. Neither the size of the mono-specific flock nor its membership was affected by food supply. Whether food was added or not, individuals exhibited a strong site fidelity resulting in stable population size. Supplemental feeding had no effect on home-range size or distribution. In the presence of extra food, Varied Tits were observed in mono-specific flocks but rarely in mixed-species flocks. However, when we stopped feeding they shifted to mixed-species flocking. After adding food, mixed-species flocks were significantly smaller than in the control samples. Varied Tits were more likely to join mixed-species Becks as temperatures dropped and wind speed increased. These results suggest that intra-specific sociality of Varied Tits is relatively insensitive to food supply, but they easily shift to mixed-species flocking in relation to food and weather conditions. We conclude that Varied Tits participate in mixed-species flocks to obtain short-term benefits - e.g. increased foraging efficiency - but they also obtain long-term benefits from stability of pair bonds and strong site fidelity, which did not respond to supplemental food.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available