Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

Is Bird Song a Reliable Signal of Aggressive Intent? A Reply

William A. Searcy, Rindy C. Anderson and Stephen Nowicki
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology
Vol. 62, No. 7 (May, 2008), pp. 1213-1216
Published by: Springer
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40295145
Page Count: 4
  • Download ($43.95)
  • Cite this Item
Is Bird Song a Reliable Signal of Aggressive Intent? A Reply
Preview not available

Abstract

We advocate assessing the reliability of signals of aggressive intent by eliciting aggressive signaling from a subject, giving the subject an opportunity to attack a model, and testing whether the subject's displays predict a subsequent attack. Using this design, we found that most singing behaviors are poor predictors of attack in song sparrows (Melospiza melodia). Laidre and Vehrencamp (Behav Ecol Sociobiol, DOI 10.1007/s00265-007-0539-3, 2008) suggested altering our experimental design to make the model more realistic; it remains to be seen whether such design changes would change the association between display and attack. Laidre and Vehrencamp (Behav Ecol Sociobiol, DOI 10.1007/s00265-007-0539-3, 2008) also suggested that the reliability of soft song, the one display that predicts attack in song sparrows, can be explained by a vulnerability cost. We question the rationale for a vulnerability cost for this display and suggest instead that soft song has a competing functions cost, in that, by using soft song to counter an intruder, a male sacrifices other possible functions of vocal signaling.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
[1213]
    [1213]
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1214
    1214
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1215
    1215
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1216
    1216