Register      Login
Australian Journal of Zoology Australian Journal of Zoology Society
Evolutionary, molecular and comparative zoology
Shopping Cart: ( empty )
You are here: Home > Journals > ZO > ZO06007
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Contents Vol 54(2)

Development of mound-building in Australian brush-turkeys (Alectura lathami): the role of learning, testosterone and body mass

Ann Göth A C and Lee Astheimer B
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A Department of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2009, Australia.

B Institute for Conservation Biology and Law, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia.

C Corresponding author. Email: ann.goeth@bio.mq.edu.au

Australian Journal of Zoology 54(2) 71-78 https://doi.org/10.1071/ZO06007
Submitted: 16 January 2006  Accepted: 15 March 2006   Published: 11 May 2006

Abstract

Australian brush-turkeys (Alectura lathami) hatch in incubation mounds of organic material and have no parental role models to learn from. When raised in outdoor aviaries, without adults, four of six males built incubation mounds at an early age of 4.5–9 months. The two males without mounds were the only ones without detectable levels of testosterone (T) at 4.5 months, whereas body mass did not explain the presence or absence of mound building. At the age of 11 months, all males had detectable T, including those without mounds. This study also investigated the development of social dominance in males kept in mixed-sex groups for 4.5 months. At this latter age, higher-ranked males tended to have higher T levels (P = 0.076), whereas dominance ranks at 4.5 months were not correlated with body mass or size, either at this age or at hatching. Overall, these results suggest that mound building develops without learning, and there is a relationship between T levels and dominance status as well as the absence or presence of mound building. These findings contribute to discussions on the role of learning in behavioural development and the role of T and body mass in avian life history.


Acknowledgments

Many thanks go to the numerous volunteers from Macquarie University that assisted with egg collection, and to the landowners on the Central Coast of New South Wales for allowing us access to incubation mounds on their property. Thanks also to C. Evans for logistical support, A. Heiling for checking incubators on weekends, L. Evans for help with behavioural observations, R. Marshall for veterinary support, W. McTegg for chick maintenance and M. Herberstein and her crew for help with aviary building. AG was supported by a Macquarie University Research Fellowship and grants from the Department of Psychology and Macquarie University.


References

Baltin, S. (1969). Zur Biologie und Ethologie des Talegalla-Huhnes (Alectura lathami Gray) unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Verhaltens während der Brutperiode. Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie 26, 524–572.
Bates P. (1991). ‘The Development and Integration of Behaviour.’ (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.)

Bernardo, J. (1996). The particular maternal effect of propagule size, especially egg size: patterns, models, quality of evidence and interpretations. American Zoologist 36, 216–236.
Birks S. M. (1991). Mate choice in Australian brush-turkeys, Alectura lathami: a preliminary report. In ‘Proceedings of the First International Megapode Symposium’. (Ed. D. N. Jones.) pp. 49–62. (Natural History Museum: Leiden.)

Birks S. M. (1996). Reproductive behavior and paternity in the Australian brush-turkey, Alectura lathami. Ph.D. Thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.

Birks, S. M. (1999). Unusual timing of copulations in the Australian brush-turkey. Auk 116, 169–177.
Booth D. T., and Jones D. N. (2002). Underground nesting in the megapodes. In ‘Avian Incubation: Behaviour, Environment, and Evolution’. (Ed. D. C. Deeming.) pp. 192–206. (Oxford University Press: Oxford.)

Crome, F. H. J. , and Brown, E. (1979). Notes on social organisation and breeding of the orange footed scrubfowl Megapodius reinwardt. Emu 79, 111–119.
Greenspan R. J. (2001). ‘Genes and Behavior: Animal Models.’ (Elsevier Sciences: Amsterdam.)

Hess, E. H. (1964). Imprinting in birds. Science 146, 1128–1139.
| PubMed | Jones D. N. (1987a). Behavioural ecology of reproduction in the Australian brush-turkey Alectura lathami. Ph.D. thesis, Griffith University, Brisbane.

Jones, D. N. (1987b). Selection of incubation mound sites by the Australian brush-turkey Alectura lathami. Ibis 130, 251–260.
Jones D. N., Dekker R. W. R. J., and Roselaar C. S. (1995). ‘The Megapodes.’ (Oxford University Press: Oxford.)

Lefebvre L., and Bouchard J. (2003). Social learning about food in birds. In ‘The Biology of Traditions’. (Ed. S. Perry.) pp. 94–126. (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.)

Mousseau T. A., and Fox C. W. (1998). ‘Maternal Effects as Adaptations.’ (Oxford University Press: New York.)

Raethel H. S. (1988). ‘Die Hühnervögel der Welt.’ (J. Neumann-Neudamm: Melsungen.)

Seymour, R. S. (1991). The brush turkey. Scientific American 256, 108–114.
Shapiro J. L. (1980). Species identification in birds: a review and synthesis. In ‘Species Identity and Attachment’. (Ed. A. Roy.) pp. 69–111. (Garland STPM: New York.)

Shapiro, J. L. (1981). Pre-hatching influences that can potentially mediate post-hatching attachments in birds. Bird Behaviour 3, 1–18.
Suboski M. D. (1989). Recognition learning in birds. In ‘Perspectives in Ethology’. (Ed. P. Klopfer.) pp. 137–171. (Plenum Press: New York.)

ten Cate, C. , and Vos, D. R. (1999). Sexual imprinting and evolutionary processes in birds: a reassessment. Advances in the Study of Behavior 28, 1–31.


West, M. J. , King, A. P. , and White, D. J. (2003). The case for developmental ecology. Animal Behaviour 66, 617–622.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

White, D. J. , King, A. P. , Cole, A. , and West, M. J. (2002). Opening the social gateway: early vocal and social sensitivities in brown-headed cowbirds (Molothrus ater). Ethology 108, 23–37.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

Wolf, J. B. , Brodie, E. D. , Cheverud, J. M. , Moore, A. J. , and Wade, M. J. (1998). Evolutionary consequences of indirect genetic effects. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 13, 64–69.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |