02171nas a2200205 4500008004100000245008100041210006900122520153400191653001501725653002101740653003101761653001301792100001801805700001501823700001301838700001501851700001701866700002601883856005601909 2019 eng d00aHeterospecific alarm-call recognition in two warbler hosts of common cuckoos0 aHeterospecific alarmcall recognition in two warbler hosts of com3 a

Species facing similar selection pressures should recognize heterospecific alarm signals. However, no study has so far examined heterospecific alarm-call recognition in response to parasitism by cuckoos. In this study, we tested whether two sympatric host species of the common cuckoo Cuculus canorus, Oriental reed warbler Acrocephalus orientalis (ORW, main host), and black-browed reed warbler Acrocephalus bistrigiceps (BRW, rare host), could recognize each other’s alarm calls in response to cuckoos. Dummies of common cuckoo (parasite) and Eurasian sparrowhawk Accipiter nisus (predator) were used to induce and record alarm calls of the two warbler species, respectively. In the conspecific alarm-call playback experiments, ORW responded more strongly to cuckoo alarm calls than to sparrowhawk alarm calls, while BRW responded less strongly to cuckoo alarm calls than to sparrowhawk alarm calls. In the heterospecific alarm-call playback experiments, both ORW and BRW responded less strongly to cuckoo alarm calls than sparrowhawk alarm calls. BRW seemed to learn the association between parasite-related alarm calls of the ORW and the cuckoo by observing the process of ORW attacking cuckoos. In contrast, alarm calls of BRW to cuckoos were rarely recorded in most cases. BRW with low parasite pressure still developed recognition of heterospecific parasite-related alarm call. Unintended receivers in the same community should recognize heterospecific alarm calls precisely to extract valuable information.

10aalarm call10aBrood parasitism10aHeterospecific recognition10aplayback1 aYu, Jiangping1 aLu, Hailin1 aSun, Wei1 aLiang, Wei1 aWang, Haitao1 aMøller, Anders, Pape uhttp://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10071-019-01307-902390nas a2200229 4500008004100000022001400041245005700055210005600112260001600168520171900184653002601903653002201929653002101951653001801972653001801990653001802008100002202026700001802048700002102066700001802087856005502105 2018 eng d a2193-719200aParent-absent begging and the risk of nest predation0 aParentabsent begging and the risk of nest predation cFeb-11-20203 a

Despite the fact that parent-absent begging (PAB) has been studied as a communication tool during competition between nestlings for food or as a signal of need, its role in nest predation has been poorly investigated. In this study we examined whether the natural level of Common Cuckoo (hereafter “Cuckoo”) PAB increases the risk of artificial nest predation (n = 48) by using three types of experimental playback of parent-present begging (PPB) which differ in the presence or absence of additional PPB, PAB or periods of silence. Contrary to our predictions, we did not find a significant difference in daily survival rates between PPB + PAB vs. PPB + PPB nests or between PPB + PAB vs. PPB + silence nests, indicating that the natural level of Cuckoo PAB did not influence nest vulnerability to predation. Moreover, we did not find a significant difference between nests with any of the types of playback and completely silent control nests, suggesting that not only PAB, but also begging behaviour itself, does not present an important predation cost for nestlings, at least not in cases when nestlings beg at the natural level used in our experiment. As we filmed all experimental nests during their exposure to predators, we were able to show that eight of 20 filmed nest-predation events were caused by predators that never or rarely predate upon passerine nests. Excluding predation events by these unlikely predators, however, did not change our original results. Nonetheless, we advocate direct identification of nest predators to strengthen the interpretation of future studies on the predation cost of begging.

10aAcoustic solicitation10aBegging frequency10aBegging loudness10acommon cuckoo10aNest predator10aNest survival1 aJelínek, Václav1 aŠulc, Michal1 aWeidinger, Karel1 aHonza, Marcel uhttp://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10336-018-1608-202371nas a2200241 4500008004100000022001300041245005800054210005800112260001600170520149800186653002101684653002101705653001801726653002401744653002701768653001901795100001801814700001501832700001601847700001501863700001801878856023301896 2018 eng d a0376635700aComponents of variation in female common cuckoo calls0 aComponents of variation in female common cuckoo calls cJan-10-20183 a

Investigations on bird vocalizations have largely focused on males. Female vocalizations are widespread in birds but few studies have investigated female vocal characteristics, particularly in non-Passeriformes. In this study, we use new field recordings from China, and calls available from an online sound library to examine temporal patterns, call consistency and geographical variation in vocalizations of female common cuckoos Cuculus canorous. The peak in vocal activity (both male and female) was in the morning, which contrasts to what would be predicted if the sole function of the female call was to distract the attention of hosts after parasitizing a host’s nest in the afternoon. Both male and female common cuckoos were more vocally active in sunny weather, than rainy weather. We also found larger intra-individual variation in female rather than in male calls, which may benefit female cuckoos by increasing stimulation to host species. Peak frequency of female calls decreased with increased latitude, while differences in female call features were not associated with geographic distance. In summary, our findings that female calls are used in the morning, rather than at peak egg laying, yet are highly variable and show little geographic patterns suggest that the function of these female calls may be more variable and intricate than previously thought. However, because research on female vocalizations is underrepresented, future studies are still needed.

10aacoustic signals10acall consistency10acommon cuckoo10afemale vocalization10ageographical variation10avocal activity1 aDeng, Zhuqing1 aLloyd, Huw1 aXia, Canwei1 aLiang, Wei1 aZhang, Yanyun uhttps://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0376635718302997https://api.elsevier.com/content/article/PII:S0376635718302997?httpAccept=text/xmlhttps://api.elsevier.com/content/article/PII:S0376635718302997?httpAccept=text/plain02963nas a2200193 4500008004100000245012100041210006900162260001600231300001400247490000800261520233300269100001802602700001902620700001802639700001502657700001702672700002602689856005402715 2017 eng d00aAlarm call-based discrimination between common cuckoo and Eurasian sparrowhawk in a Chinese population of great tits0 aAlarm callbased discrimination between common cuckoo and Eurasia cJan-08-2017 a542 - 5500 v1233 a

Morphological resemblance of the common cuckoo Cuculus canorus to the Eurasian sparrowhawk Accipiter nisus has been regarded as an example of predator mimicry. Common hosts could distinguish parasites as the result of coevolution, while rare hosts or non-hosts may mistake cuckoos for hawks because rare hosts or non-hosts behave similarly when faced with these two species. Birds usually produce alarm calls in addition to showing behavioral responses when in danger. However, previous studies of identification by rare hosts or non-hosts of sparrowhawks usually lacked experimental evidence of alarm calls. Great tits Parus major, a rare cuckoo host, perform similar behaviors and usually produce alarm calls in response to sparrowhawks and common cuckoos. Here, we tested whether great tits could distinguish common cuckoo from sparrowhawk based on analysis of their alarm calls and the effects of playback of alarm calls on conspecific behavior. Previous studies showed that great tits have a complex communication system that conveys information about predators, and they could perform different kinds of response behavior to different alarm calls. If great tits have not made the ability to distinguish between common cuckoo and sparrowhawk, then their acoustic responses to these two species and their response behaviors in playback experiments should be similar. Specimens of a common cuckoo (parasite), a sparrowhawk (predator) and an Oriental turtle dove Streptopelia orientalis (harmless control) were used to elicit and subsequently record the response behavior and alarm calls of great tits. There was no significant difference in behavioral response among great tits when exposed to the dummy of cuckoo, sparrowhawk and dove. In contrast, they differed significantly in alarm calls. Great tits produced more notes per call that contained increasing D-type and decreasing I-type notes when responding to sparrowhawk as compared to cuckoo or dove. In playback experiments, we found that great tits responded more strongly to great tit hawk than to great tit cuckoo or great tit dove alarm calls. Our study suggests that great tits are able to distinguish sparrowhawks from common cuckoos and convey relevant information in alarm calls by adjusting the number and combinations of notes of a single call type.

1 aYu, Jiangping1 aXing, Xiaoying1 aJiang, Yunlei1 aLiang, Wei1 aWang, Haitao1 aMøller, Anders, Pape uhttp://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/eth.2017.123.issue-8