Abstract

Urban animals often show bolder behaviour towards humans than their nonurban conspecifics. However, it is unclear to what extent this difference is due to consistent individual characteristics or to plasticity such as habituation. To address this question, we investigated parental risk-taking behaviour in 371 female great tits in urban and forest populations by checking their nest repeatedly (several times per week, for up to nine breeding episodes) and recording their behavioural responses to this recurring disturbance during incubation. We found that urban females were bolder, as they stayed on the nest more often than females in forests. Furthermore, great tits produced alarm calls around the nests more frequently in urban than in forest habitats. There was no habitat difference in the frequency of an antipredator behaviour, the hissing threat display on the nest, although this was rare in both habitats. We also tested the consistency and plasticity of risk-taking behaviour on three different temporal scales (within breeding attempts, between broods within a year and across years). Staying on the nest was highly repeatable within females, whereas alarm calls had low repeatability within pairs at all three temporal scales. The probability of staying on the nest increased within breeding attempts, whereas the probability of alarm calls increased across years. Neither consistency nor plasticity in these components of risk taking differed between urban and forest habitats. We conclude that urban birds are bolder in multiple behavioural measures and, overall, both stable individual differences and behavioural plasticity may have contributed to the higher risk taking we often see in urban populations. Furthermore, staying on the nest appears to be an individually consistent trait in female great tits regardless of habitat urbanization, providing a low-impact measurement of risk taking, which may potentially facilitate field studies related to individual differences in behaviour. • Urban great tits alarm-call at humans more than their forest conspecifics. • Urban females stay on the nest upon human disturbance more often than forest birds. • Staying on the nest is repeatable, increases during incubation but not across years. • Neither repeatability nor plasticity of risk taking differs between cities and forests. • Staying on the nest might be a good proxy of boldness in female birds.

Highlights

  • Urban animals often show bolder behaviour towards humans than their nonurban conspecifics

  • We conclude that urban birds are bolder in multiple behavioural measures and, overall, both stable individual differences and behavioural plasticity may have contributed to the higher risk taking we often see in urban populations

  • Urban animals may habituate to anthropogenic disturbance, i.e. learn that humans, which they initially perceive as threatening, are not dangerous, and reduce their avoidance responses towards humans, leading to more risk-taking behaviour compared to their nonurban conspecifics (Cavalli, Baladron, Isacch, Biondi, & Bo, 2018; Vincze et al, 2016)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Urban animals often show bolder behaviour towards humans than their nonurban conspecifics. One mechanism through which urban populations can become bolder on average than nonurban populations is differential colonization (Møller, 2010; referred to as ‘personality-dependent habitat selection’ by; Carrete & Tella, 2011) This hypothesis suggests that individuals with consistently higher risk-taking behavioural phenotypes are those that settle in the novel, urban habitats. Other studies have found individual consistency in risk-taking behaviour towards humans and no habituation over repeated observations, suggesting that stable among-individual variation is relatively more important for these behavioural differences between habitats (Carrete & Tella, 2013; Holtmann, Santos, Lara, & Nakagawa, 2017; Sprau & Dingemanse, 2017). Studying habituation and consistent differences between individuals simultaneously may aid our understanding of the mechanisms of urban adaptation, yet no study to our knowledge has compared both individual consistency and plasticity in risk-taking behaviour towards humans between urban and nonurban conspecifics

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

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 call

Disclaimer: 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.