A nest of begging chicks invites an intuitive explanation: needy chicks want to be fed and parents want to feed them. Surprisingly, however, in a quarter of species studied, parents ignore begging chicks. Furthermore, parents in some species even neglect smaller chicks that beg more, and preferentially feed the biggest chicks that beg less. This extreme variation across species, which contradicts predictions from theory, represents a major outstanding problem for the study of animal signalling. We analyse parent–offspring communication across 143 bird species, and show that this variation correlates with ecological differences. In predictable and good environments, chicks in worse condition beg more, and parents preferentially feed those chicks. In unpredictable and poor environments, parents pay less attention to begging, and instead rely on size cues or structural signals of quality. Overall, these results show how ecological variation can lead to different signalling systems being evolutionarily stable in different species.

Offspring survival can often depend on successful communication with parents about their state of need. Theory suggests that offspring will be less likely to honestly signal their need when they experience greater competition from either a greater number of nestmates or less-related nestmates. We found support for this hypothesis with a comparative analysis, examining data from across 60 species of birds. We found that offspring are less honest about their level of need when (i) they face competition from current siblings; (ii) their parents are likely to breed again, and so they are in competition with future siblings; and (iii) parental divorce or death means that they are likely to be less related to future siblings. More generally, these patterns highlight the sensitivity of communication systems to conflict between signaler and receiver while also suggesting that when there is little conflict, natural selection favors the honest.

Inclusive fitness requires a careful accounting of all the fitness effects of a particular behavior. Verbal arguments can potentially exaggerate the inclusive fitness consequences of a behavior by including the fitness of relatives that was not caused by that behavior, leading to error. We show how this “double‐counting” error can arise, with a recent example from the signaling literature. In particular, we examine the recent debate over whether parental divorce increases parent–offspring conflict, selecting for less honest signaling. We found that, when all the inclusive fitness consequences are accounted for, parental divorce increases conflict between siblings, in a way that they can select for less honest signaling. This prediction is consistent with the empirical data. More generally, our results illustrate how verbal arguments can be misleading, emphasizing the advantage of formal mathematical models.

Mothers, fathers, and offspring regularly clash over how much care offspring receive. Offspring beg to solicit for more resources--but how much begging is rewarded can depend on who is listening. While both parents benefit from provisioning offspring, each would benefit from their partner shouldering more of the burden of care, leading to sexual conflict. Additionally, if the costs and benefits of provisioning differ by sex, parent-offspring conflict should vary by sex. How these evolutionary conflicts influence sex differences in parent-offspring communication is unknown. To determine whether the sexes differ in their response to offspring signals, we conducted a meta-analysis on 30 bird species, comparing responsiveness to social and physiological traits affecting conflict. We found that a species' typical pair bond strength predicts whether males or females respond more to offspring begging. In species with stable and/or monogamous bonds, and thus lower sexual and paternal-offspring conflict, males' provisioning effort is more strongly correlated with offspring begging than females'. The opposite holds for species with weak pair bonds: females respond more to begging, perhaps compensating for males' lower responsiveness. These results demonstrate that sex differences in parental care can arise via sex differences in parent-offspring communication, driven by evolutionary conflicts.