Evolution of nest architecture in tyrant flycatchers and allies

Abstract

Innovations in nest design are thought to be one potential factor in the evolutionary success of passerine birds (order: Passeriformes), which colonized new ecological niches as they diversified in the Oligocene and Miocene. In particular, tyrant flycatchers and their allies (parvorder: Tyrannida) are an extremely diverse group of New World suboscine passerines occupying a wide range of habitats and exhibiting substantial extant variation in nest design. To explore the evolution of nest architecture in this clade, we first described nest traits across the Tyrannida phylogeny and estimated ancestral nest conditions. We then quantified macroevolutionary transition rates between nest types, examined a potential coevolutionary relationship between nest type and habitat, and used phylogenetic mixed models to determine possible ecological and environmental correlates of nest design. The Tyrannida ancestor probably built a cup nest in a closed habitat, and dome nests independently evolved at least 15 times within this group. Both cup- and dome-nesting species diversified into semi-open and open habitats, and we did not detect a coevolutionary relationship between nest type and habitat. Furthermore, nest type was not significantly correlated with several key ecological, life-history and environmental traits, suggesting that broad variation in Tyrannida nest architecture may not easily be explained by a single factor. This article is part of the theme issue ‘The evolutionary ecology of nests: a cross-taxon approach’.

The evolutionary ecology of nests: a cross-taxon approach

“…Cup nesting and domed nesting species both diversified to inhabit open and semi-open habitats, indicating that there were no coevolutionary relationships between habitat and nest type. Further, Ocampo et al [51] did not find a link between nest type and a range of life history and environmental traits, suggesting that no one factor determines the evolution of nest architecture in the Tyrannida [51].…”

“…Several of the papers in this special issue further advance our understanding of the evolution of birds' nests. Ocampo et al [51] examine the evolution of nest architecture of tyrant flycatchers and their allies and they show that the Tyrannida ancestor likely built a cup nest in a closed habitat, although domed nests evolved at least 15 times quite independently within the group. Cup nesting and domed nesting species both diversified to inhabit open and semi-open habitats, indicating that there were no coevolutionary relationships between habitat and nest type.…”

A Review of the Roles Materials Play in Determining Functional Properties of Bird Nests

“…Of course, our improved understanding of nest function fuels the question: how did the variety of nests in bird evolve? Recent attempts to explore the evolution of bird nests (e.g., Price & Griffith 2017, Duursma et al 2018, Fang et al 2018, Medina 2019, Ocampo et al 2023, Perez et al 2023, Vanadzina et al 2023 all employ macro-ecological techniques based on often qualitative descriptions of nests or nest architecture from large numbers of species and as many ecological and abiotic variables as they can use. Unsurprisingly, some variables exhibit significant effects on nest evolution, but our general understanding is not always improved.…”

Nest traits for the world's birds

“…We have also described basic environmental and morphological correlations between major structure and location categories, demonstrating that the placement of the nest is more closely linked to broad-scale environmental variation than is the structure of the nest itself. One possible interpretation of this is that environmental factors may have driven finer scaled variation in nest features other than gross morphological type (Medina, 2019;Ocampo et al, 2023), such as nest dimensions (Perez et al, 2023;Vanadzina, Street, Healy, et al, 2023); another explanation may be that nest structure is more closely linked to ecological and life history factors not considered here, such as clutch size (Heenan & Seymour, 2011) or predation rates (Collias & Collias, 2014;Hall et al, 2015;Mainwaring et al, 2015;Martin, 1993b;Matysioková & Remeš, 2022). There are also potentially differences in the level of genetic control governing speciesand population-level variation in nest structure versus nest location (Fang et al, 2018;Healy et al, 2023), underscoring the importance of uniting comparative work with research into the behavioural and mechanistic basis of nest building.…”