Eavesdropping and cue denial in avian acoustic signals

Soft calls do not modulate aggressiveness in male common cuckoos toward conspecific territorial intruders: A sequential playback study

In many bird species loud broadcast calls serve as aggressive signals with a large effective radius, whereas soft calls may indicate aggression at a closer distance, and are often directed at a nearby conspecific individual. Male common cuckoos (Cuculus canorus) are famous for their simple cu-coo calls, which are long-range broadcast calls, uttered in long sequences during the breeding season. Cuckoos also produce soft calls, including a single gowk (wah), a series of gowks (gowk series), or a harsher single variant, the guo call. To our knowledge, no previous study has attempted to understand the function of cuckoos' soft calls. We conducted a sequential playback experiment by (i) first attracting male cuckoos with "cu-coo" calls, and then (ii) playing heterospecific control calls or one of several types of cuckoo soft calls. While the "cu-coo" call attracted focal males, neither the soft conspecific calls nor the heterospecific control calls elicited an additional response. Finally, the gowk series calls did not alter cuckoos' approach to the speaker when played together with "cu-coo" calls. As cuckoos' soft calls did not increase or decrease aggression, they instead may advertise the cuckoo's presence and position for a nearby conspecific.

Tactics of evasion: strategies used by signallers to deter eavesdropping enemies from exploiting communication systems

Eavesdropping predators, parasites and parasitoids exploit signals emitted by their prey and hosts for detection, assessment, localization and attack, and in the process impose strong selective pressures on the communication systems of the organisms they exploit. Signallers have evolved numerous anti-eavesdropper strategies to mitigate the trade-off between the costs imposed from signal exploitation and the need for conspecific communication. Eavesdropper strategies fall along a continuum from opportunistic to highly specialized, and the tightness of the eavesdropper-signaller relationship results in differential pressures on communication systems. A wide variety of anti-eavesdropper strategies mitigate the trade-off between eavesdropper exploitation and conspecific communication. Antagonistic selection from eavesdroppers can result in diverse outcomes including modulation of signalling displays, signal structure, and evolutionary loss or gain of a signal from a population. These strategies often result in reduced signal conspicuousness and in decreased signal ornamentation. Eavesdropping enemies, however, can also promote signal ornamentation. While less common, this alternative outcome offers a unique opportunity to dissect the factors that may lead to different evolutionary pathways. In addition, contrary to traditional assumptions, no sensory modality is completely 'safe' as eavesdroppers are ubiquitous and have a broad array of sensory filters that allow opportunity for signal exploitation. We discuss how anthropogenic change affects interactions between eavesdropping enemies and their victims as it rapidly modifies signalling environments and community composition. Drawing on diverse research from a range of taxa and sensory modalities, we synthesize current knowledge on anti-eavesdropper strategies, discuss challenges in this field and highlight fruitful new directions for future research. Ultimately, this review offers a conceptual framework to understand the diverse strategies used by signallers to communicate under the pressure imposed by their eavesdropping enemies.

Nestling begging calls increase predation risk by corvids

Despite nest predation being the most common cause of breeding failure in open-nesting birds, we have little insight into the cues used by nest predators when they search for nests. So far we have assumed that nest-predating birds are visually oriented while mammal predators to a large extent use scent and auditory cues like nestling begging calls. To evaluate how important nestling begging calls are for corvid nest predators searching for nests, I used artificial nests, which made it possible to find the real costs of the begging without mitigation by parental and nestling behavior. I used paired artificial nests, one with and one without nestling begging call playback. Within 10 days, 62.9% of the nests were predated. The analyses showed that nests with begging calls suffered a significantly higher predation rate than nests without begging calls, especially when the nests were placed close to corvid nests. Moreover, nests with begging calls were predated significantly earlier than nests without begging calls. In artificial nest pairs with both nests predated but on different days, nests with begging calls were predated first. In nest pairs with only one predated nest, nests with begging calls were predated most often. This experiment shows that nestling begging calls imply a cost in terms of increased and earlier nest predation, and that corvids use nestling begging calls as a cue to find and depredate bird nests, challenging earlier expectations.