» Articles » PMID: 10821621

Evidence for a Rule Governing the Avoidance of Superfluous Escape Flights

Overview
Journal Proc Biol Sci
Specialty Biology
Date 2000 May 23
PMID 10821621
Citations 15
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

When an imminent attack by a predator on a group of birds is signalled to non-detectors only by the departure of the detector, non-detectors may make time-wasting false-alarm flights in response to mistaken or non-predator-driven departures. The frequency of false-alarm flights might be reduced if group members assess the reason for single departures before responding. Immediate flights should only occur after multiple simultaneous departures, because these are only likely to be generated by an attack. The response delay between the detectors' departure and the next birds that respond should then be dependent on the number of detectors. On sparrowhawk attack, response delays in redshanks decreased significantly as detector number increased, controlling for raptor conspicuousness and proximity, and flock size and spacing. If response delay is modified because of risk dilution, it should increase with flock size and, consequently, the rate of alarm flights due to mistakes should decrease. However, response delay did not increase and flight frequency due to misidentification of non-raptors or non-predator-driven departures did not decrease with flock size. Significantly more feeding time was lost by birds in small flocks, suggesting that the dilution effect decreased the cost of each false-alarm flight rather than their frequency.

Citing Articles

Fine-scale tracking reveals visual field use for predator detection and escape in collective foraging of pigeon flocks.

Delacoux M, Kano F Elife. 2024; 13.

PMID: 39264274 PMC: 11392528. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.95549.


Individual and collective encoding of risk in animal groups.

Sosna M, Twomey C, Bak-Coleman J, Poel W, Daniels B, Romanczuk P Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019; 116(41):20556-20561.

PMID: 31548427 PMC: 6789631. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1905585116.


Time to revisit? A predator's previous successes and failures in prey capture determine its return time to patches.

Vijayan S, Lee J, Balaban-Feld J, Mitchell W, Kotler B, Rosenzweig M Oecologia. 2019; 190(2):387-397.

PMID: 31147778 DOI: 10.1007/s00442-019-04425-w.


Disturbance of a rare seabird by ship-based tourism in a marine protected area.

Marcella T, Gende S, Roby D, Allignol A PLoS One. 2017; 12(5):e0176176.

PMID: 28489902 PMC: 5425178. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0176176.


Imitation Combined with a Characteristic Stimulus Duration Results in Robust Collective Decision-Making.

Toulet S, Gautrais J, Bon R, Peruani F PLoS One. 2015; 10(10):e0140188.

PMID: 26465751 PMC: 4605660. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0140188.


References
1.
Hamilton W . Geometry for the selfish herd. J Theor Biol. 1971; 31(2):295-311. DOI: 10.1016/0022-5193(71)90189-5. View

2.
Elgar M . Predator vigilance and group size in mammals and birds: a critical review of the empirical evidence. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 1989; 64(1):13-33. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-185x.1989.tb00636.x. View

3.
Pulliam H . On the advantages of flocking. J Theor Biol. 1973; 38(2):419-22. DOI: 10.1016/0022-5193(73)90184-7. View

4.
Roberts . How many birds does it take to put a flock to flight?. Anim Behav. 1998; 54(6):1517-22. DOI: 10.1006/anbe.1997.0544. View