Balzfüttern, Teilen oder tolerierter Diebstahl von Nahrung bei der Kolbenente (Netta rufina)?

Amat, Juan A.

doi:10.1007/bf02462242

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 23 publications

(26 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…An analogous example would be courtship 521 feeding in birds (Amat 2000), which is clearly derived from offspring provisioning, Although the associations we found between food sharing and the predictor 540 variables were significant, they were not absolute. Thus, some species in which sharing 541 could potentially have been used to maintain coalitionary relationships or facilitate mate 542 choice did not do so (cf.…”

Section: Specifically This Concerned Nomascus Concolor Pongo Abeliimentioning

confidence: 83%

The evolution of food sharing in primates

Jaeggi

Schaik

2011

Behav Ecol Sociobiol

153

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study is to explain the occurrence of food sharing across primates. Defined as the unresisted transfer of food, evolutionary hypotheses have to explain why possessors should relinquish food rather than keep it. While sharing with offspring can be explained by kin selection, explanations for sharing among unrelated adults are more controversial. Here we test the hypothesis that sharing occurs with social partners that have leverage over food possessors due to the opportunity for partner choice in other contexts. Thus, we predict that possessors should relinquish food to potential mates or allies, who could provide or withhold matings or coalitionary support in the future. We used phylogenetic analyses based on both maximum likelihood and Bayesian approaches in a sample of 68 primate species to test these predictions. The analyses strongly indicate that (1) sharing with offspring is predicted by the relative processing difficulty of the diet, as measured by the degree of extractive foraging, but not overall diet quality, (2) food sharing among adults only evolved in species already sharing with offspring, regardless of diet, and (3) male-female sharing co-evolved with the opportunity for female mate choice and sharing within the sexes with coalition formation. These results provide comparative support for the hypothesis that sharing is "traded" for matings and coalitionary support in the sense that these services are statistically associated and can thus be selected for. Based on this, we predict that sharing should occur in any species with opportunities for partner choice. The aim of this study is to explain the occurrence of food sharing across 26 primates. Defined as the unresisted transfer of food, evolutionary hypotheses have to 27 explain why possessors should relinquish food rather than keep it. While sharing with 28 offspring can be explained by kin selection, explanations for sharing among unrelated 29 adults are controversial. Here we test the hypothesis that sharing occurs with social 30 partners that have leverage over food possessors due to the opportunity for partner 31 choice in other contexts. Thus, we predict that possessors should relinquish food to 32 potential mates or allies, who could provide or withhold matings or coalitionary support 33 in the future. We used phylogenetic analyses based on both maximum likelihood and 34Bayesian approaches in a sample of 68 primate species to test these predictions. The 35 analyses strongly indicate that (i) sharing with offspring is predicted by the relative 36 processing difficulty of the diet, as measured by the degree of extractive foraging, but 37 not overall diet quality, (ii) food sharing among adults only evolved in species already 38 sharing with offspring, regardless of diet, and that (iii) male-female sharing co-evolved 39 with the opportunity for female mate choice and sharing within the sexes with coalition 40 formation. These results provide comparative support for the hypothesis that sharing is 41 "traded" for matin...

show abstract

Section: Specifically This Concerned Nomascus Concolor Pongo Abeliimentioning

confidence: 83%

The evolution of food sharing in primates

Jaeggi

Schaik

2011

Behav Ecol Sociobiol

153

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Primates have been the focus of most sharing studies, and harassment appears to be ubiquitous among them, occurring in titi monkeys, squirrel monkeys, capuchins, macaques, gibbons, bonobos and chimpanzees. Harassment also occurs in several bird species (Amat 2000) but is often referred to as 'scrounging' (Barnard & Sibly 1981;Giraldeau & Caraco 2000;Ha et al 2003). Harassment and begging are almost universal across taxa that feed altricial offspring (reviewed in Kilner & Johnstone 1997).…”

Section: Harassmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

A conceptual framework for nonkin food sharing: timing and currency of benefits

Stevens¹,

Gilby²

2004

Animal Behaviour

150

156

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many animal species, from arthropods to apes, share food. This paper presents a new framework that categorizes nonkin food sharing according to two axes: (1) the interval between sharing and receiving the benefits of sharing, and (2) the currency units in which benefits accrue to the sharer (especially food versus nonfood). Sharers can obtain immediate benefits from increased foraging efficiency, predation avoidance, mate provisioning, or manipulative mutualism. Reciprocity, trade, status enhancement and group augmentation can delay benefits. When benefits are delayed or when food is exchanged for nonfood benefits, maintaining sharing can become more difficult because animals face discounting and currency conversion problems. Explanations that involve delayed or nonfood benefits may require specialized adaptations to account for timing and currency-exchange problems. The immediate, selfish fitness benefits that a sharer may gain through by-product or manipulative mutualism, however, apply to various foodsharing situations across many species and may provide a simpler, more general explanation of sharing.

show abstract

“…Food sharing is considered as a prosocial behavior, which is by definition intended to benefit one or more other individuals (Batson & Powell, ) and can be defined as the joint use of a monopolizable food source (Stevens & Gilby, ). Despite the costs for donors, which consists in giving‐up the nutritional value of the food, food sharing has been observed in numerous taxa like insects (Vahed, ), fish (Griffiths & Armstrong, ), birds (Amat, ; Arnold & Owens, ; de Kort, Emery, & Clayton, ), primates (see Jaeggi & van Schaik, for review; de Waal, ; Hauser, Chen, Chen, & Chuang, ; Feistner & Price, ), and other mammals like lions (Cooper, ), wolves (Dale, Range, Stott, Kotrschal, & Marshall‐Pescini, ), killer‐whales (Wright, Stredulinsky, Ellis, & Ford, ), or vampire bats (Carter & Wilkinson, , ; Wilkinson, ). More importantly, food sharing has been observed in very different contexts, between kin, during parent and offspring interactions for example (Feistner & McGrew, ), but also between non‐kin (Clutton‐Brock, ; Stevens & Gilby, ; Wilkinson, Carter, Bohn, & Adams, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Food sharing and affiliation: An experimental and longitudinal study in cockatiels (Nymphicus hollandicus)

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Food sharing has attracted much attention because of its apparently altruistic nature and its link to prosociality. However, food sharing has been mostly studied in a reproductive context, during courtship and parental care, where the fitness benefits are obvious. We still lack a clear understanding of the functions of food sharing outside any reproductive context and within social groups of same‐aged peers. Previous studies suggest that cofeeding, the action to let another animal feed from the same monopolizable food source, may be used to build and strengthen bonds between individuals. This may be particularly crucial in social birds forming long‐term associations between mates or siblings such as psittacids and corvids. Here, we investigated food sharing and affiliative behaviors such as allopreening in a psittacine species, namely in a group of captive juvenile cockatiels (Nymphicus hollandicus) consisting of five siblings and five unrelated birds. Our main objective was to study the developmental pattern of food sharing over time and its implication in social bonding depending on kinship, affiliation, and sex. Studying cockatiels in this context is providing many new information since most of the studies on food sharing in birds focused on corvids. We found that, contrary to jackdaws, cockatiels continued to share food with multiple individuals, although the frequency of cofeeding as well as the number of cofeeding partners decreased over time. Cockatiels shared more food with their siblings than with other conspecifics but they were not more likely to do cofeeding with birds of the opposite sex. We also found evidence that young cockatiels exchanged more food with those from whom they received food (reciprocity) and, to a lesser extent, allopreening (interchange), than from other cockatiels. Our findings suggest that in cockatiels, food sharing within social groups serves the formation (and maintenance) of affiliative bonds, especially between siblings, rather than pair bonds, but might additionally be explained by reciprocity, interchange, and harassment avoidance.

show abstract

Balzfüttern, Teilen oder tolerierter Diebstahl von Nahrung bei der Kolbenente (Netta rufina)?

Cited by 9 publications

References 23 publications

The evolution of food sharing in primates

The evolution of food sharing in primates

A conceptual framework for nonkin food sharing: timing and currency of benefits

Food sharing and affiliation: An experimental and longitudinal study in cockatiels (Nymphicus hollandicus)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About