Social relationships and individual contribution to cooperative behaviour in captive common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus)

The social relationships between the members of a family consisting of eight captive common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus) are here examined, as well as the participation of individual family members in infant carrying and defensive behaviour against non-related intruders (adolescent males). Within the social relationships, a clear division of the family into three subgroups (parents, adult offspring, non-adult offspring) could be determined, whereby the adult offspring, especially with respect to the parents, occupy a peripheral position. In the types of cooperative behaviour examined here, substantial participation in infant carrying could be observed in only four family members (parents, adult son, one subadult daughter), and in defence against intruders in only two family members (adult son, one subadult daughter). Participation in infant carrying remained stable throughout the study period. Conversely, individual changes in participation in defence against intruders could be determined, dependent upon the presence of infants carried. The advantages and disadvantages of social substructuring observed are discussed here, in particular the peripheral position of adult offspring, possible connections in individually varied participation in cooperative behaviour, and possible regulative mechanisms. In view of past studies on cooperative behaviour among marmosets, it is here presumed that pronounced individual differences result from a division of labour within the family with respect to various aspects of cooperative behaviour.     

Why hummingbirds have such large crops

Summary Male Anna's Hummingbirds (Calypte anna) defend territories that contain a predictable food source, floral nectar. For such a hummingbird, the meal size that maximizes long-term net energy intake is less than the maximal crop volume. Smaller meals must be consumed more frequently, but larger meals increase body mass and therefore flight cost. Individuals without territories or with inadequate territories do not have easy access to nectar and intrude on territories owned by otherC. anna, where they may be chased at nay time. It was predicted that these intruders should minimize the number of potentially risky intrusions necessary for maintenance by ingesting as much nectar as possible whenever they manage to feed without being chased (usually when owners are temporarily absent). Therefore, relative to uninterrupted feeding by owners, uninterrupted intruders should feed longer and take larger meals. Field observations supported these predictions. Intruders apparently filled their crops in all seasons, whereas owners ingested smaller amounts (0.21–0.22 ml) and fed for lengths of time consistent with the prediction of an optimization model (0.21 ml). Thus, owners may energetically optimize meal size whereas intruders fill their crops whenever they are not chased. Under most conditions, hummingbirds only fill their crops one-tenth to one-third full, leading to the question why hummingbirds have such large crops. This study demonstrates that a large crop volume may be of survival value when an individual lacks a territory or has inadequate access to resources and must poach on others' territories.     

Subtle visits despite guards: Theft from nest of stingless bee (Meliponini) by orchid bee (Euglossini)

The theft of food items and building materials from nests of stingless bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae: Meliponini) is most commonly carried out by other Meliponini bee species, especially by those related to genus Lestrimelitta Friese, 1903. In this note, we recorded the theft of cerumen and propolis made by a species of the orchid bee, Euglossa annectans Dressler, 1982 (Apidae: Euglossini) from the nest of the stingless bee Tetragonisca angustula (Latreille, 1811). We noticed that the guard workers of T. angustula did not attack the thief bee even though it did not come sufficiently close to the entrance tube of the nest.     

Consistency in boldness expression varies with ecological context in a jumping spider

Animals can adjust their behaviours depending on ecological context (i.e., behavioural plasticity), and an individual's response to a given context may also vary from occasion to occasion (intra‐individual variability). Recognizing the roles of both behavioural plasticity and intra‐individual variability is important in understanding how behavioural diversity is maintained within populations. However, how the ecological context itself influences the individual behavioural response and intra‐individual variability (e.g., how variable an individual is in their behavioural expression) remains largely unexplored. Here, we examine boldness expression (the duration of startle response) in a specialised spider‐eating jumping spider, Portia labiata, across three contexts following a mild disturbance: presence of a conspecific intruder (most dangerous), environmental change but no conspecific intruder, and no conspecific intruder or environmental change (safest). We found that context does not significantly influence the average boldness expression at the population level. However, each individual responded to each context differently, and the repeatability of boldness expression—the proportion of behavioural variation attributable to the between ‐individual level—is context‐dependent. We also found that in the presence of a conspecific intruder, spiders behave less predictably than in the environmental change context, but not differently from the safest context. These findings may suggest that the presence of conspecifics influences behavioural consistency in individuals, but that this may occur without influencing the population average behaviour.