Abstract
Theory predicts that an animal’s decision of how much to invest into an ongoing project should depend only on future benefits and not on past costs (Dawkins and Carlisle 1976, Boucher 1977). A Gosleriolation of this rule has become known as the Concorde fallacy. But past costs and future benefits are often closely correlated. This difficulty may be circumvented by uncoupling both, i.e. manipulating future benefits and leaving costs unchanged or vice versa (Robertson and Biermann 1979, Weatherhead 1982, Curio 1983, Carlisle 1985, Windt and Curio 1986).KeywordsClutch SizeRisk IndexBrood SizeFuture BenefitNest DefenceThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
