No abstract

No abstract

Success in problem solving, a form of innovativeness, can help animals exploit their environments, and recent research suggests that it may correlate with reproductive success. Innovativeness has been proposed to be especially beneficial in urbanized habitats, as suggested by superior problem-solving performance of urban individuals in some species. If there is stronger selection for innovativeness in cities than in natural habitats, we expect problem-solving performance to have a greater positive effect on fitness in more urbanized habitats. We tested this idea in great tits (Parus major) breeding at two urban sites and two forests by measuring their problem-solving performance in an obstacle-removal task and a food-acquisition task. Urban pairs were significantly faster problem-solvers in both tasks. Solving speed in the obstacle-removal task was positively correlated with hatching success and the number of fledglings, whereas performance in the food-acquisition task did not correlate with reproductive success. These relationships did not differ between urban and forest habitats. Neophobia, sensitivity to human disturbance, and risk taking in the presence of a predator did not explain the relationships of problem-solving performance either with habitat type or with reproductive success. Our results suggest that the benefit of innovativeness in terms of reproductive success is similar in urban and natural habitats, implying that problem-solving skills may be enhanced in urban populations by some other benefits (e.g. increased survival) or reduced costs (e.g. more opportunities to gain practice with challenging tasks).

No abstract

Behavioral research often involves capturing and video‐recording birds, but these procedures may have undesired effects on the behavior of birds that have rarely been quantified. In addition, birds in urban and more natural areas may differ in their sensitivity to disturbance. We examined the possible effects of both capturing, weighing and measuring, and taking a blood sample, and the presence of video‐cameras on the behavior of male and female Great Tits (Parus major) breeding in urban and forest habitats. Using a 2 × 2 block design, we compared the behavior and breeding success of parents that either were or were not captured on their nests a few days before behavioral observations, and of parents that either were or were not habituated to the presence of a concealed video‐recorder mounted on nest boxes. We found no significant effects of habituation to the camera on bird behavior, but males captured in their nest boxes were more vigilant and hesitated longer before entering nest boxes, and also had slightly lower provisioning rates than males that had not been captured. Captured females also tended to be more vigilant than females that had not been captured, but their provisioning rates were not affected. Capturing males also influenced the behavior of their non‐captured mates, but capturing females had no effect on the behavior of their non‐captured mates. We found no difference in the effects of capture on Great Tits in urban and forest habitats, and our treatments also had no effect on the mass, size, and survival of nestlings until fledging. Our results suggest that, for Great Tits, being captured results in sex‐dependent behavioral effects that can last for at least several days. As such, we suggest that the possibility of similar effects in other species of birds should be considered in behavioral studies where birds must be captured, and recommend either that behavioral data be collected before capturing birds or that all birds in a study should be captured and handled in a standardized way.

Wild animals living in proximity to humans may benefit from recognizing people individually and adjusting their behaviour to the potential risk or gain expected from each person. Although several urban-dwelling species exhibit such skills, it is unclear whether this is due to pre-existing advanced cognitive abilities of taxa predisposed for city life or arises specifically in urban populations either by selection or through ontogenetic changes facilitated by exposure to humans. To test these alternatives, we studied populations of house sparrows (Passer domesticus) along the urbanization gradient. We manipulated the birds' experience (hostile or not) associated with humans with different faces (masks) and measured their behavioural responses to the proximity of each person. Contrary to our expectations, we found that while rural birds showed less fear of the non-hostile than of the hostile or an unfamiliar person, urban birds made no distinction. These results indicate that house sparrows are less able to recognize individual humans or less willing to behaviourally respond to them in more urbanized habitats with high human population density. We propose several mechanisms that may explain this difference, including reduced pay-off of discrimination due to a low chance of repeated interactions with city people, or a higher likelihood that city people will ignore them.

Urban animals often take more risk toward humans than their non‐urban conspecifics do, but it is unclear how urbanization affects behavior toward non‐human predators. Responses to humans and non‐human predators may covary due to common mechanisms enforcing a phenotypic correlation. However, while increased tolerance toward humans may be advantageous for urban animals, reduced vigilance toward non‐human predators that can pose actual threat may be costly. Therefore, urban animals may benefit from showing specific responses to different threat levels, such as humans versus non‐human predators, or hostile versus non‐hostile humans. To test these alternatives, we compared responses (latencies to return to nest) of urban and forest‐breeding great tits (Parus major) to familiar hostile and unfamiliar humans as well as one of their common predators, the sparrowhawk (Accipiter nisus). We found that urban birds were more risk‐taking toward both humans and sparrowhawk than forest birds. However, responses to sparrowhawk did not correlate with responses to humans either within or across habitats. This suggests that higher risk‐taking of urban compared to forest‐dwelling great tits toward sparrowhawk may be threat‐specific response to lower predation risk rather than a spillover effect of increased tolerance to humans. Furthermore, birds responded similarly to unfamiliar and familiar (potentially dangerous) humans in both habitats, suggesting that great tits may not adjust their risk‐taking to the threat represented by individual humans. These findings indicate that urban birds may flexibly adjust their risk‐taking to certain, but not all, types of threat.

No abstract