Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Signals of need in parent–offspring communication and their exploitation by the common cuckoo

Nature volume 397, pages 667–672 (1999)Cite this article

Abstract

Nestling birds present vivid gapes and produce loud calls as they solicit food, but the complexity of the display is poorly understood. Here we explain the function of reed warbler begging signals and show how they are exploited by the common cuckoo, Cuculus canorus, a brood parasite. Reed warbler parents integrate visual and vocal signals from their young to adjust their provisioning rates, and the two signals convey more accurate information about offspring need than either does alone. The cuckoo chick has a particularly striking begging display which has been suggested to be irresistible to host parents. However, we show that the cuckoo, reared alone in the nest, presents a deficient visual display, and elicits the same amount of care as a reed warbler brood only by compensating with its exaggerated vocal display. Therefore the cuckoo succeeds not through mimicry of the host brood begging signals, but by tuning into the sensory predispositions of its hosts.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Effect of food deprivation.
Figure 2: Effect of playback treatments.
Figure 3: Relationship between nestling mass and feeding rate.
Figure 4: Relationship between nestling mass and begging call rate or gape area.
Figure 5: Chick gapes.
Figure 6: Comparison of observed and predicted begging call rates.
Figure 7: Comparison of predicted and observed provisioning rates.

References

  1. Zuk, M., Ligon, J. D. & Thornhill, R. Effects of experimental manipulation of male secondary sex characters on female mate preference in red jungle fowl. Anim. Behav. 44, 999–1006 (1992).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Marchetti, K. The evolution of multiple male traits in the yellow-browed leaf warbler. Anim. Behav. 55, 361–372 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Scheffer, S. J., Uetz, G. W. & Stratton, G. E. Sexual selection, male morphology, and the efficacy of courtship signalling in two wolf spiders (Araneae: Lycosidae). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 38, 17–23 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Rowe, C. & Guilford, T. Hidden colour aversions in domestic chicks triggered by pyrazine odours of insect warning displays. Nature 383, 520–522 (1996).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Kilner, R. M. & Davies, N. B. Nestling mouth colour: ecological correlates of a begging signal. Anim. Behav. 56, 705–712 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Redondo, T. & Arias de Reyna, L. Locatability of begging calls in nestling altricial birds. Anim. Behav. 36, 653–661 (1988).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Møller, A. P. & Pomiankowski, A. Why have birds got multiple sexual ornaments? Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 32, 167–176 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Schluter, D. & Price, T. Honesty, perception and population divergence in sexually selected traits. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 253, 117–122 (1993).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Iwasa, Y. & Pomiankowski, A. The evolution of mate preferences for multiple sexual ornaments. Evolution 48, 853–867 (1994).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Johnstone, R. A. Honest advertisement of multiple qualities using multiple signals. J. Theor. Biol. 177, 87–94 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Johnstone, R. A. Multiple displays in animal communication: ‘backup signals’ and ‘multiple messages’. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 351, 329–338 (1996).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  12. Johnstone, R. A. in Behavioural Ecology (eds Krebs, J. R. & Davies, N. B.) (155–178) (Blackwell, Oxford, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Davies, N. B., Kilner, R. M. & Noble, D. G. Nestling cuckoos, Cuculus canorus, exploit hosts with begging calls that mimic a brood. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 265, 673–678 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Dawkins, R. & Krebs, J. R. Arms races between and within species. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 205, 489–511 (1979).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Dawkins, R. The Selfish Gene (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kilner, R. & Johnstone, R. A. Begging the question: are offspring solicitation behaviours signals of need? Trends Ecol. Evol. 12, 11–15 (1997).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Kilner, R. Mouth colour is a reliable signal of need in begging canary nestlings. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 264, 963–968 (1997).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  18. Price, K., Harvey, H. & Ydenberg, R. Begging tactics of nestling yellow-headed blackbirds, Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus. Anim. Behav. 51, 421–435 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Trivers, R. Parent-offspring conflict. Am. Zool. 14, 249–264 (1974).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Mock, D. W. & Parker, G. A. The Evolution of Sibling Rivalry (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Godfray, H. C. J. Signalling of need by offspring to their parents. Nature 352, 328–330 (1991).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  22. Godfray, H. C. J. Evolutionary theory of parent-offspring conflict. Nature 376, 133–138 (1995).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Davies, N. B. & Brooke, M. de L. Cuckoos versus reed warblers: adaptations and counter adaptations. Anim. Behav. 36, 262–284 (1988).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Jenner, E. Observations on the natural history of the cuckoo. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 78, 219–237 (1788).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Brooke, M. de L. & Davies, N. B. Provisioning of nestling cuckoos Cuculus canorus by reed warbler Acrocephalus scirpaceus hosts. Ibis 131, 250–256 (1989).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Cramp, S. The Birds of the Western Palearctic Vols IV, IX (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 1995).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Noble, D. G., Davies, N. B., Hartley, I. R. & McRae, S. B. The red gape of the nestling cuckoo (Cuculus canorus) is not a supernormal stimulus for three common cuckoo hosts. Behaviour (submitted).

  28. Guilford, T. & Dawkins, M. S. Receiver psychology and the evolution of animal signals. Anim. Behav. 42, 1–14 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Ryan, M. J. in Behavioural Ecology (eds Krebs, J. R. & Davies, N. B.) 179–202 (Blackwell, Oxford, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Alcock, J. Animal Behaviour (Sinauer, Sunderland, 1998).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Harper, A. B. The evolution of begging: sibling competition and parent-offspring conflict. Am. Nat. 128, 99–114 (1986).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Godfray, H. C. J. Signaling of need between parents and young: parent-offspring conflict and sibling rivalry. Am. Nat. 146, 1–24 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Wyllie, I. The Cuckoo (Batsford, London, 1981).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Redondo, T. Exploitation of host mechanisms for parental care by avian brood parasites. Etologia 3, 235–297 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Lichtenstein, G. & Sealy, S. G. Nestling competition, rather than supernormal stimulus, explains the success of parasitic brown-headed cowbird chicks in yellow warbler nests. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 265, 249–254 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank NERC for funding the research; the National Trust for allowing us to work at Wicken Fen; C. Thorne and the Wicken Fen Group for research facilities; M. de L. Brooke for assistance infinding nests; M. de L. Brooke, F. Hunter, R. Johnstone and N. Langmore for comments on the manuscript; and B. Grenfell for producing Fig. 7. The experiments were done under licence from English Nature. R.M.K. was funded by a Junior Research Fellowship at Magdalene College, Cambridge.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, CB2 3EJ, Cambridge, UK

    R. M. Kilner, D. G. Noble & N. B. Davies

Authors
  1. R. M. Kilner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. D. G. Noble
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. N. B. Davies
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. M. Kilner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kilner, R., Noble, D. & Davies, N. Signals of need in parent–offspring communication and their exploitation by the common cuckoo. Nature 397, 667–672 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1038/17746

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/17746

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing