Innate plasticity of a predatory behavior: nonlearned context dependence of avian flush-displays

If a foraging adaptation comprises a signal for sensory exploitationof prey, does the behavior and its use develop through learning,like many foraging behaviors or does it depend on nonlearnedstereotypical motor actions, like many signals for sensory exploitation?We asked whether the visually conspicuous motor pattern of bodypivoting with spread tail and wings used by the painted redstart(Myioborus pictus) to flush insect prey is a nonlearned phenotypictrait. The motion pattern and the increase in these displaysunder branches (context dependence based on physical propertiesof the habitat) help the wild birds in foraging because preythat rest on substrates is visually stimulated, flushed intothe air, and consequently chased in aerial pursuits. In unrewardedconditions in the aviary, both the foraging-experienced adultsand the foraging-naive hand-raised fledglings increased thefrequency of flush-displays at locations with substrates abovebirds, recreating the pattern of foraging observed in adultsin their natural habitats. The results imply that parent–offspringcultural transmission or learning during foraging is not requiredfor the development of both the display motion pattern and theadaptive context-dependent increase in display frequency. Sucha nonlearned context dependence based on physical propertiesof the habitat is remarkable considering that avian foragingcontext-dependent plasticity is often based on learning. Wehypothesize that this innate character of the signals may bea result of evolution to exploit universal properties of visuallytriggered escape behaviors of various insects that are predictablyflushed from their resting sites in the habitat.