False alarms and information transmission in grouping animals

A key benefit of grouping in prey species is access to social information, including information about the presence of predators. Larger groups of prey animals respond both sooner and at greater distances from predators, increasing the likelihood that group members will successfully avoid capture. However, identifying predators in complex environments is a difficult task, and false alarms (alarm behaviours without genuine threat) appear surprisingly frequent across a range of taxa including insects, amphibians, fish, mammals, and birds. In some bird flocks, false alarms have been recorded to substantially outnumber true alarms. False alarms can be costly in terms of both the energetic costs of producing alarm behaviours as well as lost opportunity costs (e.g. abandoning a feeding patch which was in fact safe, losing sleep if an animal is resting/roosting, or losing mating opportunities). Models have shown that false alarms may be a substantial but underappreciated cost of group living, introducing an inherent risk to using social information and a vulnerability to the propagation of false information. This review will focus on false alarms, introducing a two-stage framework to categorise the different factors hypothesised to influence the propensity of animal groups to produce false alarms. A number of factors may affect false alarm rate, and this new framework splits these factors into two core processing stages: (i) individual perception and response; and (ii) group processing of predator information. In the first stage, individuals in the group monitor the environment for predator cues and respond. The factors highlighted in this stage influence the likelihood that an individual will misclassify stimuli and produce a false alarm (e.g. lower light levels can make predator identification more difficult and false alarms more common). In the second stage, alarm information from individuals is processed by the group. The factors highlighted in this stage influence the likelihood of alarm information being copied by group members and propagated through the group (e.g. some animals implement group processing mechanisms that regulate the spread of behavioural responses such as consensus decision making through the quorum response). This review follows the structure of this new framework, focussing on the causes of false alarms, factors that influence false alarm rate, the transmission of alarm information through animal groups, mechanisms to mitigate the spread of false alarms, and the consequences of false alarms.     

Anti‐Predator Signals in the Chaffinch Fringilla coelebs in Response to Habitat Structure and Different Predator Types

Many animals respond to the presence of predators with conspicuous signals such as alarm calling. These signals may aid the detection of the predator by conspecifics or may deter the predator from attack. The advantages of such signals may be dependent upon predator type and habitat type. We measured signalling behaviours (alarm calling and tail flicking) in foraging chaffinches in response to different predator models (hawk and pigeon control, cat and plastic box as control). In addition we measured responses to a cat model when chaffinches were foraging in different habitat structures (obstructed vs. open). There was no difference in the number of individual chaffinches alarm calling in obstructed vs. open habitat, but birds tail flicked more in open habitat, suggesting that tail flicking acts as a visual signal to the predator or conspecifics and therefore unlike auditory cues is influenced by habitat structure. Chaffinches were also more likely to tail flick in response to the cat model than the other three models. Our results are consistent with the idea that animals may respond to ground predators, which spend a large amount of time observing prey before attack, by using signalling behaviours, such as tail flicking and alarm calling. Further work on prey selection by predators is needed to separate the functions of signalling behaviour in response to predators.     

Accommodating natural and sexual selection in butterfly wing pattern evolution

Visual patterns in animals may serve different functions, such as attracting mates and deceiving predators. If a signal is used for multiple functions, the opportunity arises for conflict among the different functions, preventing optimization for any one visual signal. Here we investigate the hypothesis that spatial separation of different visual signal functions has occurred in Bicyclus butterflies. Using phylogenetic reconstructions of character evolution and comparisons of evolutionary rates, we found dorsal surface characters to evolve at higher rates than ventral characters. Dorsal characters also displayed sex-based differences in evolutionary rates more often than did ventral characters. Thus, dorsal characters corresponded to our predictions of mate signalling while ventral characters appear to play an important role in predator avoidance. Forewing characters also fit a model of mate signalling, and displayed higher rates of evolution than hindwing characters. Our results, as well as the behavioural and developmental data from previous studies of Bicyclus species, support the hypothesis that spatial separation of visual signal functions has occurred in Bicyclus butterflies. This study is the first to demonstrate, in a phylogenetic framework, that spatial separation of signals used for mate signalling and those used for predator avoidance is a viable strategy to accommodate multiple signal functions. This signalling strategy has important ramifications on the developmental evolution of wing pattern elements and diversification of butterfly species.     

An offspring signal of quality affects the timing of future parental reproduction

Solicitation signals by offspring are well known to influence parental behaviour, and it is commonly assumed that this behavioural effect translates into an effect on residual reproduction of parents. However, this equivalence assumption concerning behavioural and reproductive effects caused by offspring signals remains largely untested. Here, we tested the effect of a chemical offspring signal of quality on the relative timing and amount of future reproduction in the European earwig (Forficula auricularia). We manipulated the nutritional condition of earwig nymphs and exposed females to their extract, or to solvent as a control. There were no significant main effects of exposure treatment on 2nd clutch production, but exposure to extracts of well-fed nymphs induced predictable timing of the 2nd relative to the 1st clutch. This result demonstrates for the first time that an offspring signal per se, in the absence of any maternal behaviour, affects maternal reproductive timing, possibly through an effect on maternal reproductive physiology.     

Fork-tailed drongos use deceptive mimicked alarm calls to steal food

Despite the prevalence of vocal mimicry in animals, few functions for this behaviour have been shown. I propose a novel hypothesis that false mimicked alarm calls could be used deceptively to scare other species and steal their food. Studies have previously suggested that animals use their own species-specific alarm calls to steal food. However none have shown conclusively that these false alarms are deceptive, or that mimicked alarm calls are used in this manner. Here, I show that wild fork-tailed drongos (Dicrurus adsimilis) make both drongo-specific and mimicked false alarm calls when watching target species handling food, in response to which targets flee to cover abandoning their food. The drongo-specific and mimicked calls made in false alarms were structurally indistinguishable from calls made during true alarms at predators by drongos and other species. Furthermore, I demonstrate by playback experiments that two of these species, meerkats (Suricata suricatta) and pied babblers (Turdoides bicolor), are deceived by both drongo-specific and mimicked false alarm calls. These results provide the first conclusive evidence that false alarm calls are deceptive and demonstrate a novel function for vocal mimicry. This work also provides valuable insight into the benefits of deploying variable mimetic signals in deceptive communication.     

To call or not to call: parents assess the vulnerability of their young before warning them about predators

Communication about predators can reveal the effects of both conspecific and heterospecific audiences on signalling strategy, providing insight into signal function and animal cognition. In species that alarm call to their young, parents face a fundamental dilemma: calling can silence noisy offspring and so make them less likely to be overheard, but can also alert predators that young are nearby. Parents could resolve this dilemma by being sensitive to the current vulnerability of offspring, and calling only when young are most at risk. Testing whether offspring vulnerability affects parental strategy has proved difficult, however, because more vulnerable broods are often also more valuable. We tested experimentally whether parent white-browed scrubwren, Sericornis frontalis, assessed brood noisiness when alarm calling near nests. When a model predator was nearby, parents gave more alarm calls when playbacks simulated noisy broods, yet brood noisiness did not affect adult calling when only a control model was present. Parents were therefore sensitive to the tradeoff between silencing young and alerting predators to the presence of nests. Our study demonstrates that receiver vulnerability can affect signalling decisions in species other than primates.     

Signalling of information that is neither cryptic nor private

It is commonly assumed that in order for animal signals to be advantageous, the information being signalled could not have been obtained otherwise, and is therefore ‘cryptic’ or ‘private’. Here, we suggest a scenario in which individuals can gain an advantage by signalling ‘public’ information that is neither cryptic nor private. In that scenario, signalling increases the efficiency with which that ‘public’ information is transmitted. We formalize our idea with a game in which offspring can signal their condition to their parents. Specifically, we consider a resource‐strapped parent who can only invest in one of its two offspring, and we allow offspring the chance to influence parental investment through a signal. A parent in the game seeks to invest in the higher‐quality offspring, which it could identify either through a publicly available cue, such as body size, or by relying on a signal provided by the offspring. We find that if the signal can convey information about offspring quality more efficiently than cues, then signalling of condition between offspring and parents can be favoured by selection, even though parents could potentially have acquired the same information from the cue. Our results suggest that the biological function of signals may be broader than currently considered, and provide a scenario where low cost signalling can be favoured. More generally, efficiency benefits could explain signalling across a range of biological and economic scenarios.     

Effects of adaptive predatory and anti-predator behaviour in a two-prey—one-predator system

Summary Two prey populations that share a common predator can interact indirectly by causing changes in the predator's foraging behaviour. Previous work suggests that adaptive choice of prey by the predator usually has two related consequences: (i) the predation rate on a particular prey species increases with the relative and/or absolute abundance of that prey; and (ii) increases in either prey population produce a short-term increase in the fitness of the other prey (short-term indirect mutualism between prey). This paper investigates how these two consequences are changed if the prey exhibit adaptive anti-predator behaviour. In this case, the predation rate on a particular prey often decreases as the prey's density increases. The predator then usually exhibits negative switching between prey. However, the presence of adaptive antipredator behaviour does not change the short-term mutualism between prey. In this case, as a prey becomes less common, it achieves a larger growth rate by reducing its anti-predator effort. These results imply that observations of the relationship between prey density and predation rate cannot be used to infer the nature of the behavioural indirect effect between prey that share a predator.     

Linking the evolution and form of warning coloration in nature

Many animals are toxic or unpalatable and signal this to predators with warning signals (aposematism). Aposematic appearance has long been a classical system to study predator–prey interactions, communication and signalling, and animal behaviour and learning. The area has received considerable empirical and theoretical investigation. However, most research has centred on understanding the initial evolution of aposematism, despite the fact that these studies often tell us little about the form and diversity of real warning signals in nature. In contrast, less attention has been given to the mechanistic basis of aposematic markings; that is, ‘what makes an effective warning signal?’, and the efficacy of warning signals has been neglected. Furthermore, unlike other areas of adaptive coloration research (such as camouflage and mate choice), studies of warning coloration have often been slow to address predator vision and psychology. Here, we review the current understanding of warning signal form, with an aim to comprehend the diversity of warning signals in nature. We present hypotheses and suggestions for future work regarding our current understanding of several inter-related questions covering the form of warning signals and their relationship with predator vision, learning, and links to broader issues in evolutionary ecology such as mate choice and speciation.     

Pursuit-deterrent signals: communication between prey and predator

When encountering predators, prey animals often expose themselves by loud vocalization, by repeated movements or by revealing conspicuous colors. The more elaborate displays were often considered to be warning signals directed to other prey, and the less obvious displays to be intention movements. During the last decade, there has been increasing evidence that, in fact, prey display is aimed at the predator, apparently to deter further pursuit. This communication between two seemingly unlikely partners, prey and predator, appears to be based upon a common interest - satisfying the predator's need for further information.     

Interspecific reciprocity explains mobbing behaviour of the breeding chaffinches,Fringilla coelebs

When prey animals discover a predator close by, they mob it while uttering characteristic sounds that attract other prey individuals to the vicinity. Mobbing causes a predator to vacate its immediate foraging area, which gives an opportunity for prey individuals to continue their interrupted daily activity. Besides the increased benefits, mobbing behaviour also has its costs owing to injuries or death. The initiator of mobbing may be at increased risk of predation by attracting the predator's attention, especially if not joined by other neighbouring prey individuals. Communities of breeding birds have always been considered as temporal aggregations. Since an altruist could not prevent cheaters from exploiting its altruism in an anonymous community, this excluded any possibility of explaining mobbing behaviour in terms of reciprocal altruism. However, sedentary birds may have become acquainted since the previous non-breeding season. Migrant birds, forming anonymous communities at the beginning of the breeding season, may also develop closer social ties during the course of the breeding season. We tested whether a male chaffinch, a migrant bird, would initiate active harassment of a predator both at the beginning of the breeding season and a week later when it has become a member of a non-anonymous multi-species aggregation of sedentary birds. We expected that male chaffinches would be less likely to initiate a mob at the beginning of the breeding season when part of an anonymous multi-species aggregation of migratory birds. However, their mobbing activity should increase as the breeding season advances. Our results support these predictions. Cooperation among individuals belonging to different species in driving the predator away may be explained as interspecific reciprocity based on interspecific recognition and temporal stability of the breeding communities.     

Context‐dependent alarm signalling in an insect

Animals often respond to danger by raising alarm to inform others. Alarm signals come in many different forms, such as visual or mechanical display, sound or odour. Some animals produce vocal alarm signals that vary with the level of danger. For chemical alarm signals, virtually nothing is known about such context‐dependent signalling due to a general notion that alarm pheromones have fixed compositions. Here, we show that larvae of the Western Flower Thrips (Frankliniella occidentalis) produce an alarm pheromone whose composition varies with the level of danger they face: the presence of a relatively harmless predator or a very dangerous predator, that is either actually attacking or not. The frequency of alarm pheromone excretion increases with the level of danger. Moreover, the composition of excreted alarm pheromone varies in the relationship between total and relative amount of the putative two components, decyl acetate (DAc) and dodecyl acetate (DDAc). When pheromone is excreted with a predator present but not attacking, the percentage DDAc increases with the total amount of pheromone. When a predator does attack, however, the relationship between percentage DDAc and total amount of pheromone is reversed. Taken together, the alarm signal of thrips larvae appears to be context dependent, which to our knowledge is the first report of context‐dependent composition of an alarm pheromone.     

Referential labelling in Diana monkeys

Animal semantic communication has received considerable theoretical and empirical attention because of its relevance to human language. Advances have been made by studies of alarm-call behaviour in nonhumans. In monkeys, for example, there is evidence that recipients have a fairly sophisticated understanding of a call's meaning; that is, the predator type usually associated with a certain alarm call. Little is known, however, about the mental mechanisms that drive call production in nonhuman primates. In some nonprimate species, it has been found that signallers do not respond to a predator's physical features but instead seem to respond to its relative threat or direction of attack. In these species, therefore, alarm calls do not denote different predator categories but simply reflect different types or levels of danger. Because different predator categories typically impose different types and degrees of threat it is entirely possible that nonhuman primates also respond to threat rather than a predator's category. This study examined how wild Diana monkeys, Cercopithecus diana, of the Ta? forest, Ivory Coast, label predation events. By altering playback stimuli and the position of a concealed speaker, I investigated whether Diana monkeys respond with acoustically different alarm calls depending on a predator's (1) distance (close versus far), (2) elevation (above versus below), or (3) category (eagle versus leopard). Analysis of male and female alarm-call behaviour showed that Diana monkeys consistently responded to predator category regardless of immediate threat or direction of attack. Data further suggested that, in addition to predator category, monkeys' alarm calls might also convey information about the predator's distance. Copyright 2000 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.     

Wake up and smell the conflict: odour signals in female competition

Odour signals used in competitive and aggressive interactions between males are well studied in the context of sexual selection. By contrast, relatively little is known about comparable signals used by females, despite current interest in the evolution of female ornaments and weaponry. Available evidence suggests that odour signals are important in competitive interactions between female mammals, with reductions or reversals of male-biased sexual dimorphism in signalling where female competition is intense. Scent marking is often associated with conflict between females over access to resources or reproductive opportunities. Female scent marks may therefore provide reliable signals of competitive ability that could be used both by competitors and potential mates. Consistent with this hypothesis, we report that aggressive behaviour of female house mice is correlated with the amount of major urinary protein (MUP) excreted in their urine, a polymorphic set of proteins that are used in scent mark signalling. Under semi-natural conditions, females with high MUP output are more likely to produce offspring sired by males that have high reproductive success, and less likely to produce offspring by multiple different sires, suggesting that females with strong MUP signals are monopolized by males of particularly high quality. We conclude that odour signals are worthy of more detailed investigation as mediators of female competition.     

Mother-Offspring vocal recognition in northern fur seals is mutual but asymmetrical

During the 4-month period of offspring dependence, northern fur seal, Callorhinus ursinus, mothers and pups use a well-developed multimodal recognition ability to routinely find one another within large and dense breeding aggregations. I studied the vocal/auditory aspect of this ability to look at operational differences between the two members of a recognition dyad. If parent-offspring conflict theory is applied to animal communication behaviour, we should expect unequal selective forces acting on parents and offspring. In northern fur seal maternal recognition dyads, I expected pups to expend more energy in the reunion process because they carry the greater burden of a failed reunion. Furthermore, in terms of signal detection theory, pups should have a lower rejection threshold (lower bias) than mothers. To address these questions, I conducted vocal playback experiments and behavioural observations on a natural population of northern fur seals in the Pribilof Islands, Alaska, U.S.A. Although playback results support mutual vocal recognition, pups were both more vocally responsive and made more recognition errors (i.e. false alarms). Behavioural observations, including search time, distance travelled, signalling behaviour and contact with nonoffspring show that pups expend more effort in the reunion process. These findings are consistent with expectations and begin to quantify how selection pressure on recognition behaviour can vary at different stages of development. Copyright 2001 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.     

Receiving behaviour is sensitive to risks from eavesdropping predators

Conspicuous signals may attract both intended receivers as well as unintended receivers such as predators. However, signalling individuals are not the only ones at risk when communicating, as the intended receiver may encounter eavesdropping predators that are attracted to the same signals. Here, we show that the house mouse (Mus domesticus) behaviourally responds to social signals (scents) as though receiving carries a risk of predation. We presented mice with their own scents (low social benefit to receiving) and those from an unknown “intruder” (high social benefit to receiving) under high (cat urine added) and low (water added) perceived predation risk. Mice traded-off the potential social benefits of receiving a signal against the costs of potential predator encounter. Receiving rates of both social signals (own and intruder) were high under low predation risk. Mice reduced receiving of both social signals when predation risk was increased; however, the effect was greater for their own low value scent than for the high social value intruder scent. Notably, rates of signalling did not vary with the level of perceived predation risk. Our findings suggest that mice traded-off the potential social benefits of receiving a signal (scent mark) against the costs of potential predator encounter. We suggest that, for some species, the costs of communication are borne more by the receivers than the signallers, and that the influence of risks to receivers on the design of communication systems may have been underestimated.     

Diversity in warning coloration: selective paradox or the norm?

Aposematic theory has historically predicted that predators should select for warning signals to converge on a single form, as a result of frequency‐dependent learning. However, widespread variation in warning signals is observed across closely related species, populations and, most problematically for evolutionary biologists, among individuals in the same population. Recent research has yielded an increased awareness of this diversity, challenging the paradigm of signal monomorphy in aposematic animals. Here we provide a comprehensive synthesis of these disparate lines of investigation, identifying within them three broad classes of explanation for variation in aposematic warning signals: genetic mechanisms, differences among predators and predator behaviour, and alternative selection pressures upon the signal. The mechanisms producing warning coloration are also important. Detailed studies of the genetic basis of warning signals in some species, most notably Heliconius butterflies, are beginning to shed light on the genetic architecture facilitating or limiting key processes such as the evolution and maintenance of polymorphisms, hybridisation, and speciation. Work on predator behaviour is changing our perception of the predator community as a single homogenous selective agent, emphasising the dynamic nature of predator–prey interactions. Predator variability in a range of factors (e.g. perceptual abilities, tolerance to chemical defences, and individual motivation), suggests that the role of predators is more complicated than previously appreciated. With complex selection regimes at work, polytypisms and polymorphisms may even occur in Müllerian mimicry systems. Meanwhile, phenotypes are often multifunctional, and thus subject to additional biotic and abiotic selection pressures. Some of these selective pressures, primarily sexual selection and thermoregulation, have received considerable attention, while others, such as disease risk and parental effects, offer promising avenues to explore. As well as reviewing the existing evidence from both empirical studies and theoretical modelling, we highlight hypotheses that could benefit from further investigation in aposematic species. Finally by collating known instances of variation in warning signals, we provide a valuable resource for understanding the taxonomic spread of diversity in aposematic signalling and with which to direct future research. A greater appreciation of the extent of variation in aposematic species, and of the selective pressures and constraints which contribute to this once‐paradoxical phenomenon, yields a new perspective for the field of aposematic signalling.     

Individual-level personality influences social foraging and collective behaviour in wild birds

There is increasing evidence that animal groups can maintain coordinated behaviour and make collective decisions based on simple interaction rules. Effective collective action may be further facilitated by individual variation within groups, particularly through leader–follower polymorphisms. Recent studies have suggested that individual-level personality traits influence the degree to which individuals use social information, are attracted to conspecifics, or act as leaders/followers. However, evidence is equivocal and largely limited to laboratory studies. We use an automated data-collection system to conduct an experiment testing the relationship between personality and collective decision-making in the wild. First, we report that foraging flocks of great tits (Parus major) show strikingly synchronous behaviour. A predictive model of collective decision-making replicates patterns well, suggesting simple interaction rules are sufficient to explain the observed social behaviour. Second, within groups, individuals with more reactive personalities behave more collectively, moving to within-flock areas of higher density. By contrast, proactive individuals tend to move to and feed at spatial periphery of flocks. Finally, comparing alternative simulations of flocking with empirical data, we demonstrate that variation in personality promotes within-patch movement while maintaining group cohesion. Our results illustrate the importance of incorporating individual variability in models of social behaviour.     

Evolutionarily stable communication between kin: a general model

At present, the most general evolutionary theory of honest communication is Grafen''s model of Zahavi''s ''handicap'' signalling system, in which honesty of signals about the signaller''s quality (e.g. mate suitability or fighting ability) is maintained by the differentially high cost of signals to signallers having lower quality. The latter model is here further generalized to include any communication between signallers and receivers that are genetically related (e.g. parents and begging offspring, cooperative or competing siblings). Signalling systems involving relatives are shown to be evolutionarily stable, despite a potential pay-off for false signalling, if the Zahavian assumption of differential signal costs holds and there are diminishing reproductive returns to the signaller as the receiver''s assessed value of its attribute increases, or if, regardless of whether the Zahavian assumption holds, signallers with high values of the attribute benefit more from a given receiver assessment than signallers with low values (e.g. begging chicks that are hungrier benefit more from being fed). In stable systems of signalling among kin, it is also shown to be generally true that (i) levels of signalling and thus observed signal costs will decline as relatedness increases or as the receiver''s reproductive penalty for erroneous assessment increases, and (ii) receivers will consistently, altruistically overestimate the true value of the signalled attribute.