4.7 Article

Cooperative nest defence in red-winged blackbirds: reciprocal altruism, kinship or by-product mutualism?

Journal

PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY B-BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES
Volume 271, Issue 1535, Pages 177-182

Publisher

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2003.2586

Keywords

altruism; cooperation; tit-for-tat; mutualism; red-winged blackbirds; Agelaius phoeniceus

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Male red-winged blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus) often cooperate with their neighbours. in defending nests against predators. Some studies have suggested that this is an example of by-product mutualism, whereas others have suggested the possibility of reciprocal altruism. No study has addressed the possibility of kin-selected cooperation in nest defence in this species. Reciprocal altruism, kin selection and by-product mutualism are not mutually exclusive alternatives, but few studies of territorial neighbours have tested for multiple mechanisms simultaneously. We test for these three possibilities in a population of red-winged blackbirds. We used simulated defections to test for reciprocal altruism. We used analysis of microsatellite loci to test for kin selection between adult male neighbours. We also used microsatellite loci to test for by-product mutualism resulting from nest defence of offspring sired on neighbouring territories. We found that male red-winged blackbirds cooperate in nest defence primarily as a form of reciprocal altruism. Experimental males reduced their level of nest defence relative to controls following simulated defection by a neighbour. In contrast to some earlier studies, we found no evidence for by-product mutualism: males did not defend nests where they had sired extra-pair offspring. We also found no evidence for kin selection: males were no more cooperative with more closely related neighbours. Considered alongside the results from other studies, our study suggests that mechanisms stabilizing cooperation in red-winged blackbirds may vary among populations.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available