Skip to main content
Log in

Deceptive behavior in pied flycatchers

  • Published:
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

One explanation for polygyny in pied flycatchers (Ficedula hypoleuca) is the deception hypothesis, which proposes that females mate with already-mated males only because they are unaware that such males already have a mate on another territory. Recently this hypothesis has been criticized on the grounds that already-mated and unmated males differ sufficiently in their behavior that human observers can discriminate between the two classes fairly easily. Here we test whether male pied flycatchers change their behavior when visited by a female so as to make this discrimination more difficult. In our experiments we presented a caged female near the nestbox of an advertising male, in order to mimic the situation in which a female investigates the male and his nest site. During control periods, when only an empty cage was presented, we found that already-mated males were present on their secondary territories significantly less and sang significantly less than unmated males on their primary territories, confirming the earlier results. When we presented the stimulus female, all behaviors we measured changed significantly relative to control periods for both mated and unmated males: both classes of males increased the time spent on the territory, decreased singing rates, and increased various courtship behaviors. During the experimental periods there were no significant differences between mated and unmated males on any of the behavioral measures. Discriminant analysis was more successful in classifying males as to mating status using data from the control periods (without female) than using data from the experimental periods (with female). We conclude that when a female is present male pied flycatchers change their behavior in ways that make it more difficult to discriminate mated from unmated males.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alatalo RV, Lundberg A (1984) Polyterritorial polygyny in the pied flycatcher Ficedula hypoleuca — evidence for the deception hypothesis. Ann Zool Fenn 21:217–228

    Google Scholar 

  • Alatalo RV, Lundberg A (1986) The sexy son hypothesis: data from the pied flycatcher Ficedula hypoleuca. Anim Behav 34:1454–1462

    Google Scholar 

  • Alatalo RV, Lundberg A (1990) Polyterritorial polygyny in the pied flycatcher. In Slater PJD, Rosenblatt JS, Beer C (eds) Advances in the Study of Behaviour, vol 19. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 1–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Alatalo RV, Carlson A, Lundberg A, Ulfstrand S (1981) The conflict between male polygamy and female monogamy: the case of the pied flycatcher Ficedula hypoleuca. Am Nat 117:738–753

    Google Scholar 

  • Alatalo RV, Lundberg A, Stahlbrandt K (1982) Why do pied flycatcher females mate with already-mated males? Anim Behav 30:585–593

    Google Scholar 

  • Alatalo RV, Lundberg A, Stahlbrandt K (1984) Female mate choice in the pied flycatcher Ficedula hypoleuca. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 14:253–261

    Google Scholar 

  • Alatalo RV, Lundberg A, Glynn C (1986) Female pied flycatchers Ficedula hypoleuca choose territory quality and not male characteristics. Nature 323:152–153

    Google Scholar 

  • Alatalo RV Lundberg A, Ratti O (1990) Male polyterritoriality and imperfect female choice in the pied flycatcher, Ficedula hypoleuca. Behav Ecol 1:171–177

    Google Scholar 

  • Askenmo CEH (1984) Polygyny and nest site selection in the pied flycatcher. Anim Behav 32:972–980

    Google Scholar 

  • Breichagen T, Slagsvold T (1988) Male polyterritoriality and female-female aggression in pied flycatchers Ficedula hypoleuca. Anim Behav 36:604–606

    Google Scholar 

  • Curio E (1959) Verhaltensstudien am Trauerschnapper; Beiträge zur Ethologic und Ökologie von Muscicapa h. hypoleuca Pallas. Z Tierpsychol Suppl 3:1–118

    Google Scholar 

  • Dale S, Amundsen T, Lifjeld JT, Slagsvold T (1990) Mate sampling behavior of female pied flycatchers: evidence for active mate choice. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 27:87–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksson D, Wallin L (1986) Male bird song attracts females: a field experiment. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 19:297–299

    Google Scholar 

  • Haartman L von (1951) Successive polygamy. Behaviour 3:256–274

    Google Scholar 

  • Haartman L von (1956) Territory in the pied flycatcher (Ficedula hypoleuca). Ibis 98:460–475

    Google Scholar 

  • Haartman L von (1969) Nest-site and evolution of polygamy in European passerine birds. Ornis Fenn 46:1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Haartman L von, Hilden O, Linkola P, Suomalainen P, Tenovuo R (1963) Pohjclan linnut varikuvin. Otava, Helsinki

    Google Scholar 

  • Lifjeld JT, Slagsvold T (1986) The function of courtship feeding during incubation in the pied flycatcher Ficedula hypoleuca. Anim Behav 34:1441–1453

    Google Scholar 

  • Lifjeld JT, Slagsvold T, Stenmark G (1987) Allocation of incubation feeding in a polygynous mating system: a study on pied flycatchers Ficedula hypoleuca. Anim Behav 35:1663–1669

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd JE (1985) On deception, a way of all flesh, and firefly signalling and systematics. In: Dawkins R, Ridley M (eds) Oxford Surveys in Evolutionary Biology, vol 1. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 48–84

    Google Scholar 

  • Mish FC (1986) (ed) Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, Springfield, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

  • Ristau CA, Robbins D (1982) Cognitive aspects of ape language experiments. In: Griffin DR (ed) Animal Mind — Human Mind. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 299–331

    Google Scholar 

  • Searcy WA, Yasukawa K (1989) Alternative models of territorial polygyny in birds. Anim Behav 134:323–343

    Google Scholar 

  • Slagsvold T (1986) Nest site settlement by the pied flycatcher: does the female choose her mate for the quality of his house or himself? Ornis Scand 17:210–220

    Google Scholar 

  • Slagsvold T, Lifjeld JT, Stenmark G, Breiehagen T (1988) On the cost of searching for a mate in female pied flycatchers Ficedula hypoleuca. Anim Behav 36:433–442

    Google Scholar 

  • Stenmark G, Slagsvold T, Lifjeld JT (1988) Polygyny in the pied flycatcher, Ficedula hypoleuca: a test of the deception hypothesis. Anim Behav 36:1646–1657

    Google Scholar 

  • Temrin H (1991) Deceit of mating status in passerine birds: an evaluation of the deception hypothesis. Current Ornithol (in press)

  • Woodruff G, Premack D (1979) Intentional communication in the chimpanzee: the development of deception. Cognition 7:333–362

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Offprint requests to: W.A. Searcy

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Searcy, W.A., Eriksson, D. & Lundberg, A. Deceptive behavior in pied flycatchers. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 29, 167–175 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00166398

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00166398

Keywords

Navigation