Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Barn swallows (Hirundo rustica) differentiate between common cuckoo and sparrowhawk in China: alarm calls convey information on threat

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

Abstract

Morphological mimicry of sparrowhawks Accipiter spp. by cuckoos acts to deceive hosts and thus promotes parasitism by cuckoos. Recent studies have suggested that common hosts are able to identify parasites and make special alarm calls as the result of co-evolution between hosts and brood parasites. Previous studies showed that barn swallows Hirundo rustica could distinguish between common cuckoo Cuculus canorus and sparrowhawk Accipiter nisus in Denmark, but seemed unable to make this distinction in China. However, these previous studies did not investigate vocal responses in terms of alarm calls. We tested whether barn swallows, which are regular hosts of the common cuckoo in China, could distinguish between the common cuckoo and sparrowhawk in China. In Heilongjiang, in the presence of the cuckoo and, in Hainan, in its absence, we used dummies of common cuckoo, sparrowhawk, and Oriental turtle dove Streptopelia orientalis (neutral control) to induce and record alarm calls that were used to estimate response to playbacks. Barn swallows responded more strongly to playbacks of swallow hawk alarm calls than in response to swallow cuckoo or swallow dove alarm calls. Given that alarm calls conveyed information about the presence of potential threats, our study showed that barn swallows from both study regions in China were able to distinguish between common cuckoo and sparrowhawk and respond accordingly in their vocal behavior.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y (1995) Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J Roy Stat Soc B 57:289–300

    Google Scholar 

  • Beránková J, Veselý P, Sýkorová J, Fuchs R (2014) The role of key features in predator recognition by untrained birds. Anim Cogn 17:963–971

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Campobello D, Sealy SG (2010) Enemy recognition of reed warblers (Acrocephalus scirpaceus): threats and reproductive value act independently in nest defence modulation. Ethology 116:498–508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campobello D, Sealy SG (2011) Use of social over personal information enhances nest defense against avian brood parasitism. Behav Ecol 22:422–428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Courter JR, Ritchison G (2010) Alarm calls of tufted titmice convey information about predator size and threat. Behav Ecol 21:936–942

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craib J (1994) Why do common cuckoos resemble raptors? Br Birds 87:78–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Curio E (1978) The adaptive significance of avian mobbing: I. Teleonomic hypotheses and predictions. Z Tierpsychol 48:175–183

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies NB (2000) Cuckoos, cowbirds and other cheats. T & A D Poyser, London

  • Davies NB (2011) Cuckoo adaptations: trickery and tuning. J Zool 284:1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies NB, Welbergen JA (2008) Cuckoo-hawk mimicry? An experimental test. Proc R Soc Lond B 275:1817–1822

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Evans CS (1997) Referential signals. In: Owings DH, Beecher MD, Thompson NS (eds) Perspectives in ethology: communication, vol 12. Plenum, New York, pp 99–143

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans CS, Evans E, Marler P (1993) On the meaning of alarm calls: functional reference in an avian vocal system. Anim Behav 46:23–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feeney WE, Medina I, Somveille M, Heinsohn R, Hall ML, Mulder RA, Stein JA, Kilner RM, Langmore NE (2013) Brood parasitism and the evolution of cooperative breeding in birds. Science 342:1506–1508

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gill SA, Sealy SG (1996) Nest defence by yellow warblers: recognition of a brood parasite and an avian nest predator. Behaviour 133:263–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gill SA, Sealy SG (2003) Tests of two functions of alarm calls given by yellow warblers during nest defence. Can J Zool 81:1685–1690

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gill SA, Sealy SG (2004) Functional reference in an alarm signal given during nest defence: seet calls of yellow warblers denote brood-parasitic brown-headed cowbirds. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 56:71–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gluckman T, Mundy NI (2013) Cuckoos in raptors’ clothing: barred plumage illuminates a fundamental principle of Batesian mimicry. Anim Behav 86:1165–1181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griesser M (2008) Referential calls signal predator behavior in a group-living bird species. Curr Biol 18:69–73

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Griesser M (2009) Mobbing calls signal predator category in a kin group-living bird species. Proc R Soc Lond B 276:2887–2892

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grim T (2005) Host recognition of brood parasites: implications for methodology in studies of enemy recognition. Auk 122:530–543

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grim T, Samaš P, Moskát C, Kleven O, Honza M, Moksnes A, Røskaft E, Stokke BG (2011) Constraints on host choice: why do parasitic birds rarely exploit some common potential hosts? J Anim Ecol 80:508–518

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Halsey LG, Curran-Everett D, Vowler SL, Drummond GB (2015) The fickle P value generates irreproducible results. Nat Methods 12:179–185

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hollén LI, Manser MB (2007) Motivation before meaning: motivational information encoded in meerkat alarm calls develops earlier than referential information. Am Nat 169:758–767

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Honza M, Šicha V, Procházka P, Ležalová R (2006) Host nest defense against a color-dimorphic brood parasite: great reed warblers (Acrocephalus arundinaceus) versus common cuckoos (Cuculus canorus). J Ornithol 147:629–637

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hosoi SA, Rothstein SI (2000) Nest desertion and cowbird parasitism: evidence for evolved responses and evolutionary lag. Anim Behav 59:82–840

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kachigan SK (1991) Multivariate statistical analysis: a conceptual introduction, 2nd edn. Radius, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilner RM, Langmore NE (2011) Cuckoos versus hosts in insects and birds: adaptations, counter-adaptations and outcomes. Biol Rev 86:836–852

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kroodsma DE (1989) Suggested experimental designs for song playbacks. Anim Behav 37:600–609

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krüger O (2007) Cuckoos, cowbirds and hosts: adaptations, trade-offs and constraints. Philos T Roy Soc B 362:1873–1886

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leavesley AJ, Magrath RD (2005) Communicating about danger: urgency alarm calling in a bird. Anim Behav 70:365–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liang W, Møller AP (2015) Hawk mimicry in cuckoos and anti-parasitic aggressive behavior of barn swallows in Denmark and China. J Avian Biol 46:216–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liang W, Yang C, Wang L, Møller AP (2013) Avoiding parasitism by breeding indoors: cuckoo parasitism of hirundines and rejection of eggs. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 67:913–918

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyon BE, Gilbert GS (2013) Rarely parasitized and unparasitized species mob and alarm call to cuckoos: implications for sparrowhawk mimicry by brood parasitic cuckoos. Wilson J Ornithol 125:627–630

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moksnes A, Røskaft E, Braa AT, Korsnes L, Lampe HM, Pedersen HC (1991) Behavioural responses of potential hosts towards artificial cuckoo eggs and dummies. Behaviour 116:64–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Møller AP (1994) Sexual selection and the barn swallow. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Møller AP, Jennions MD (2002) How much variance can be explained by ecologists and evolutionary biologists. Oecologia 132:492–500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Møller AP, Stokke BG, Samia D (2015) Hawk models, hawk mimics and anti-predator behavior of prey. Behav Ecol 26:1039–1044

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakagawa S (2004) A farewell to Bonferroni: the problems of low statistical power and publication bias. Behav Ecol 15:1044–1045

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakagawa S, Cuthill IC (2007) Effect size, confidence interval and statistical significance: a practical guide for biologists. Biol Rev 82:591–605

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pavey CR, Smyth AK (1998) Effects of avian mobbing on roost use and diet of powerful owls, Ninox strenua. Anim Behav 55:313–318

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Røskaft E, Moksnes A, Stokke BG, Bicík V, Moskát C (2002) Aggression to dummy cuckoos by potential European cuckoo hosts. Behaviour 139:613–628

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein SI (1990) A model system for coevolution: avian brood parasitism. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 21:481–508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scaife M (1976) The response to eye-like shapes by birds. I. The effect of context: a predator and a strange bird. Anim Behav 24:195–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sealy SG (1995) Burial of cowbird eggs by parasitized yellow warblers: an empirical and experimental study. Anim Behav 49:877–889

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sealy SG, Neudorf DL, Hobson KA, Gill SA (1998) Nest defense by potential hosts of the brown-headed cowbird: methodological approaches, benefits of defense, and coevolution. In: Rothstein SI, Robinson SK (eds) Parasitic birds and their hosts: studies in coevolution. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 194–211

    Google Scholar 

  • Shields WM (1984a) Barn swallow mobbing: self-defence, collateral kin defence, group defence, or parental care? Anim Behav 32:132–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shields WM (1984b) Factors affecting nest and site fidelity in Adirondack barn swallows (Hirundo rustica). Auk 101:780–789

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoddard MC (2012) Mimicry and masquerade from the avian visual perspective. Curr Zool 58:630–648

    Google Scholar 

  • Strnad M, Němec M, Veselý P, Sýkorová J, Fuchs R (2012) Red-backed shrikes (Laniu scollurio) adjust the mobbing intensity, but not mobbing frequency, by assessing the potential threat to themselves from different predators. Ornis Fennica 89:206–215

    Google Scholar 

  • Suzuki TN (2012) Referential mobbing calls elicit different predator-searching behaviours in Japanese great tits. Anim Behav 84:53–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suzuki TN (2014) Communication about predator type by a bird using discrete, graded and combinatorial variation in alarm calls. Anim Behav 87:59–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suzuki TN, Ueda K (2013) Mobbing calls of Japanese tits signal predator type: field observations of natural predator encounters. Wilson J Ornithol 125:412–415

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Templeton CN, Greene E, Davis K (2005) Allometry of alarm calls: black-capped chickadees encode information about predator size. Science 308:1934–1938

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Thorogood R, Davies NB (2013) Hawk mimicry and the evolution of polymorphic cuckoos. Chin Birds 4:39–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trnka A, Grim T (2013) Color plumage polymorphism and predator mimicry in brood parasites. Front Zool 10:25

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Trnka A, Prokop P (2012) The effectiveness of hawk mimicry in protecting cuckoos from aggressive hosts. Anim Behav 83:263–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trnka A, Prokop P, Grim T (2012) Uncovering dangerous cheats: how do avian hosts recognize adult brood parasites? PLoS ONE 7, e37445

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Trnka A, Trnka M, Grim T (2015) Do rufous common cuckoo females indeed mimic a predator? An experimental test. Biol J Linn Soc 116:134–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watve M, Thakar J, Kale A, Puntambekar S, Shaikh I, Vaze K, Jog M, Paranjape S (2002) Bee-eaters (Merops orientalis) respond to what a predator can see. Anim Cogn 5:253–259

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Welbergen JA, Davies NB (2008) Reed warblers discriminate cuckoos from sparrowhawks with graded alarm signals that attract males and neighbours. Anim Behav 76:811–822

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welbergen JA, Davies NB (2011) A parasite in wolf’s clothing: hawk mimicry reduces mobbing of cuckoos by hosts. Behav Ecol 22:574–579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wheatcroft DJ, Price TD (2008) Reciprocal cooperation in avian mobbing: playing nice pays. Trends Ecol Evol 23:416–419

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wheatcroft D, Price TD (2015) Rates of signal evolution are associated with the nature of interspecific communication. Behav Ecol 26:83–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson DR, Mennill DJ (2011) Duty cycle, not signal structure, explains conspecific and heterospecific responses to the calls of black-capped chickadees (Poecile atricapillus). Behav Ecol 22:784–790

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wyllie L (1981) The cuckoo. Batsford, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang C, Chen M, Wang L, Liang W, Møller AP (2015a) Nest sanitation elicits egg discrimination in cuckoo hosts. Anim Cogn 18:1373–1377

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yang C, Liang W, Antonov A, Cai Y, Stokke BG, Fossøy F, Moksnes A, Røskaft E (2012) Diversity of parasitic cuckoos and their hosts in China. Chin Birds 3:9–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang C, Wang L, Cheng S-J, Hsu Y-C, Liang W, Møller AP (2014) Nest defenses and egg recognition of yellow-bellied prinia against cuckoo parasitism. Naturwissenschaften 101:727–734

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yang C, Wang L, Liang W, Møller AP (2015b) Nest sanitation behavior as a pre-adaptation of egg rejection to counter parasitism in hirundines. Anim Cogn 18:355–360

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Prof. Manuel Soler and the two anonymous reviewers for their constructive and helpful comments on our manuscript. We are grateful to Wenfeng Wang from the Zhalong National Nature Reserve and to Tongping Su and Yiping Hu for their assistance in fieldwork. We also thank the Baomeiling Nature Reserve, Changjiang, Hainan, and the Zhalong National Nature Reserve, Heilongjiang, for their support and permission to carry out this study. This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31272331 to HW, 31272328 and 31472013 to WL, and 31260514 to CY) and the Program for New Century Excellent Talents in University (NCET-13-0761 to CY).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Life Sciences, Jilin Provincial Key Laboratory of Animal Resource Conservation and Utilization, Northeast Normal University, Changchun, 130024, China

    Jiangping Yu & Haitao Wang

  2. Ministry of Education Key Laboratory for Tropical Animal and Plant Ecology, College of Life Sciences, Hainan Normal University, Haikou, 571158, China

    Longwu Wang, Canchao Yang & Wei Liang

  3. School of Life Sciences, Guizhou Normal University, Guiyang, 550001, China

    Longwu Wang

  4. College of Wildlife Resource, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin, 150040, China

    Xiaoying Xing

  5. Zhalong National Nature Reserve, Heilongjiang, Qiqihar, 161005, China

    Jianhua Ma

  6. Laboratoire d’Ecologie, Systématique et Evolution, CNRS UMR 8079, Université Paris-Sud, Bâtiment 362, F-91405, Orsay Cedex, France

    Anders Pape Møller

Authors
  1. Jiangping Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Longwu Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xiaoying Xing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Canchao Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jianhua Ma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Anders Pape Møller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Haitao Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Wei Liang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Haitao Wang.

Ethics declarations

The experiments comply with the current laws of China, where they were performed. Fieldwork was carried out under the permission from Zhalong National Nature Reserves and Baomeiling Nature Reserve, China. Experimental procedures were in agreement with the Animal Research Ethics Committee of Hainan Provincial Education Centre for Ecology and Environment, Hainan Normal University.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Communicated by M. Soler

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yu, J., Wang, L., Xing, X. et al. Barn swallows (Hirundo rustica) differentiate between common cuckoo and sparrowhawk in China: alarm calls convey information on threat. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 70, 171–178 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-015-2036-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-015-2036-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation