Testing four hypotheses to explain partial migration: balancing reproductive benefits with limits to fasting endurance

The underlying causes of differential migration: assumptions, hypotheses, and predictions

Mechanisms governing the migratory decisions of birds have long fascinated ecologists and sparked considerable debate. Identifying factors responsible for variation in migration distance, also known as differential migration, has been a popular approach to understanding the mechanisms underlying migratory behaviour more generally. However, research progress has been slowed by the continued testing of overlapping, non-mechanistic, and circular predictions among a small set of historically entrenched hypotheses. We highlight the body size hypothesis and suggest that the predictions commonly tested have impeded progress because body size relationships with migration distance are predictions made by several distinct hypotheses with contrasting mechanisms. The cost of migration itself has not been adequately accounted for in most hypotheses, and we propose two flight efficiency hypotheses with time- and energy-minimizing mechanisms that allow individuals to mitigate the risks inherent to longer migrations. We also advance two conceptual versions of the social dominance hypothesis based on two distinct underlying mechanisms related to distance minimization and food maximization that will help clarify the role of competition in driving migratory decisions. Overall, we describe and refine 12 mechanistic hypotheses proposed to explain differential migration (along with several other special-case hypotheses), seven of which have underlying mechanisms related to food limitation as past research has identified this to be an important driver of differential migration. We also thoroughly reviewed 145 publications to assess the amount of support for 10 critical assumptions underlying alternative hypotheses for differential migration in birds. Our review reveals that surprisingly few studies explicitly evaluate assumptions within a differential migration context. Generating and testing strong predictions and critical assumptions underlying mechanisms of alternative hypotheses will improve our ability to differentiate among these explanations of differential migration. Additionally, future intraspecific progress will be greatest if investigators continue to focus on mechanisms underlying variation in migration distance within rather than among demographic classes, as previous research has found differing mechanisms to be responsible for differential migration among demographic classes. Interspecifically, a thorough comparative analysis that seeks to explain variation in migration distance among species would broaden both our understanding of the mechanisms regulating current differential migration patterns and those that led to the evolution of migration more generally. Collectively, we provide a framework that, together with advances in animal-borne tracking and other technology, can be used to advance our understanding of the causes of differential migration distance, and migratory decisions more generally.

Should I stay or should I fly? Migration phenology, individual-based migration decision and seasonal changes in foraging behaviour of Common Woodpigeons

Migration is used by many species as a strategy to deal with a seasonally changing environment. For some species, migration patterns can vary across different or even within the same breeding area. The Common Woodpigeon Columba palumbus, an abundant and widespread Palearctic species, exhibits three migratory strategies (strictly migratory, partially migratory and resident) across its European breeding grounds. Based on ring recoveries and satellite tracking data, we investigated the migration and foraging behaviour of Woodpigeons breeding in Southwestern Europe (Portugal) and Central Europe (Germany). We found that individuals could be classified as residents (Portugal) or partial migrants (Germany), with migrating individuals following the European sector of the East Atlantic flyway, and mainly wintering in France. In addition to general data on migration phenology, we provide evidence for different migration strategies (migration of varying distances or resident behaviour), low wintering site fidelity and the use of multiple wintering sites. Furthermore, tracking data provided information on migratory behaviour in consecutive years, clearly showing that individuals may switch migratory strategies (resident vs. migrant) between years, i.e. are facultative partial migrants. While individuals from Portugal mainly stayed within a large park (‘green urban area’) year-round, Woodpigeons from the city of Giessen (Germany) regularly left the urban area to forage on surrounding farmland (with an average distance covered of 5.7 km), particularly from July to September. Overall, our results highlight the behavioural plasticity in Woodpigeons in terms of foraging and migration strategies within and amongst individuals as well as populations.

Ashmole's hypothesis and the latitudinal gradient in clutch size

One enduring priority for ecologists has been to understand the cause(s) of variation in reproductive effort among species and localities. Avian clutch size generally increases with increasing latitude, both within and across species, but the mechanism(s) driving that pattern continue to generate hypotheses and debate. In 1961, a Ph.D. student at Oxford University, N. Philip Ashmole, proposed the influential hypothesis that clutch size varies in direct proportion to the seasonality of resources available to a population. Ashmole's hypothesis has been widely cited and discussed in the ecological literature. However, misinterpretation and confusion has been common regarding the mechanism that underlies Ashmole's hypothesis and the testable predictions it generates. We review the development of well-known hypotheses to explain clutch size variation with an emphasis on Ashmole's hypothesis. We then discuss and clarify sources of confusion about Ashmole's hypothesis in the literature, summarise existing evidence in support and refutation of the hypothesis, and suggest some under-utilised and novel approaches to test Ashmole's hypothesis and gain an improved understanding of the mechanisms responsible for variation in avian clutch size and fecundity, and life-history evolution in general.