Information centre hypothesis

Last updated
Griffon vultures in a communal roost Griffon vultures Bikaner Jorbeed JEG5370.jpg
Griffon vultures in a communal roost

The information centre hypothesis (ICH) is a theory that states bird species live in communal roosts primarily for the advantage of gaining information from others in the community regarding the location of unevenly distributed food resources. [1] This hypothesis was first proposed by Peter Ward and Israeli biologist Amotz Zahavi (1973). [1] They stated that birds join assemblages in order to gain information about food resources and increase foraging efficiency. [1] Using this strategy would allow unsuccessful birds to return to the population and gain information, often by observing behavioural differences in successful birds. [1] Following the exchange of knowledge, the unsuccessful individuals then follow those deemed successful back to the resource location. [1]

Contents

The hypothesis has been studied and experimentally supported in many different types of communally roosting birds, notably crows and vultures. This strategy is regarded as evolutionarily adaptive, because it would prevent the unsuccessful bird from having to start the search for food over in a random method. [1] By the early 1980s, the information centre hypothesis was widely accepted and used to explain communal roosting behaviour, however this popularity also led to substantial criticism. [2] One criticism of the theory is the multiple assumptions required to fulfill the criteria to support the hypothesis. [2] Another criticism of the theory is its narrow scope, as it pertains strictly to food information sharing. [3] Additional criticism questions whether the information centre hypothesis is an evolutionarily stable strategy. [4]

Theory

The information centre hypothesis was first described by Peter Ward and Amotz Zahavi in 1973. [1] They theorized that communal roosts evolved and were maintained as a result of the advantage obtained by unsuccessful individuals in locating food resources from information provided by successful individuals. [5] The information centre hypothesis requires that two conditions be met; first, that successful individuals return to the communal roost after feeding, and second, birds without the knowledge of the food source must recognize these individuals as successful and then follow them back to the food source. [6] In their primary work, Ward and Zahavi studied red-billed quelea and cattle egret birds, noting that individuals who were unsuccessful in the morning would return to the communal roost and follow other birds away from the roost in the afternoon. [1]

Mock et al. (1988) provide seven requirements which must be fulfilled in a species for the information centre hypothesis to be supported. First, birds who are successful in foraging must return to rewarding locations. [2] Second, while some individuals discover these rewarding locations, others remain unaware of these locations. [2] Third, previously unsuccessful individuals must be able to recognize others as successful or unsuccessful. [2] Fourth, unsuccessful individuals must leave the communal roost when the successful individuals leave the roost. [2] Fifth, the previously unsuccessful individuals must follow the successful individuals to the feeding location. [2] Sixth, previously unsuccessful individuals must be permitted to share the food source by successful individuals. [2] Seventh, the overall net benefit of receiving information and following, must be greater than an individual searching for food on their own. [2]

While it may seem counterproductive for a successful individual to share resource knowledge, the information centre hypothesis argues that this behaviour is adaptive. [6] The information centre hypothesis argues this behaviour is a defensive mechanism so that in the event of a sudden resource devaluation which destroys the food source, the bird would be able to obtain new resource information from other roosting individuals. [6] This idea has been supported in studies which show that individuals in areas with a recent heavy snowfall searched longer for a communal roost compared to individuals in non-snowy areas. [6] This is potentially so the bird would be able to upgrade their resource knowledge with others' information. [6]

Support for the information centre hypothesis includes the idea that individuals living in groups have more resource information available, at a lower cost than finding it themselves. [4] In addition, multiple studies have made note that food sources for flock-living birds are typically consumed quickly by other predators, such as mammals or decomposers. [6] Therefore, individuals likely do not suffer from sharing knowledge with conspecifics due to the short-lived nature of the resource. [6]

Currently, there is only speculation as to how the information is conveyed. It has been suggested that the successful members first convey their knowledge through displays and the unsuccessful members then follow, or that the unsuccessful members circle in the air or slowly fly out and proceed to join the successful members when they take off. Ward and Zahavi approached the explanation for the ICH in several different ways, but each explanation is related to the ability to distribute knowledge of resources. In this case, roosting can be divided into several components: advertisement, synchronized breeding, seasonality, mood, and predation. [7]

Ward and Zahavi cited a variety of species that demonstrate behaviors supporting the ICH but no species exhibited all of the behaviors. Red-winged blackbirds ( Agelaius phoeniceus ) exhibit synchronized breeding patterns, as well as have displays to attract birds to join the same nesting site. An observation Ward and Zahavi had done of red-billed queleas and the cattle egrets showed altered behavior after individually failing to find food in the morning and later in the afternoon. However, after resting in a secondary roost, these birds that failed joined other birds and flew off in a completely different direction. White wagtails and cattle egrets are two species proposed to demonstrate advertisement, with their coloring and pattern making them very noticeable and the two species often choosing open places for assemblages. There is also a large variety of finch species that have large, long-term roosting sites as well as large food searching areas. [7]

Critiques of ICH

On an individual basis, there are not many benefits for aiding other unsuccessful and naïve or “clueless” members. For example, it is energetically costly for a successful forager to fly back to the roost and back again to the food source with more foragers. There may even be a risk of disease or parasitism with the clueless foragers accompanying the successful forager. It may be that the successful forager expects reciprocal altruism—where the unsuccessful members could provide food knowledge to the successful forager in the future—but given the size and mobility of roosts, this is unlikely to be the case. [8]

There are some questions about the applications of ICH before and after roost members fly out to search for food. It is possible that members that leave the roost at the same time will search for food independently afterwards. In fact, large group movement may be completely unrelated to food, and may be for protection from predators when flying to another location. Prior to flying out, it is difficult to determine how the transfer of information occurs. It may be that rather than at the roost, the transfer occurs locally at the food site. For instance, an individual may notice the large movement of members towards a specific location from afar. [9]

The ICH may also not apply to all species, as there are variations in hunting and scavenging behaviors. For instance, some piscivorous herons rely on stealth, which is the opposite of group feeding and movement. Several heron species are also highly territorial and do not allow for conspecific feeding. Some studies of gulls also show that colony members did not follow the knowledgeable gulls. In these cases, gull foraging behavior might be better explained by local transfer of information. [9]

Examples

A Hooded Crow (Corvus cornix) Hooded Crow (19599632701).jpg
A Hooded Crow (Corvus cornix)

In hooded crows

The information centre hypothesis has been studied in hooded crows ( Corvus cornix ). Hooded crows exhibit communal roosting behaviour and often feed in flocks, making them a good candidate species for studies of the information centre hypothesis. [6] A study conducted by Sonerud, Smedshaug, and Brathen (2001) examined the roost and feeding behaviours of 34 hooded crows over three years, with results supporting the information centre hypothesis. [6] Sonerud et al. created an environment with unpredictable and ephemeral food sources, similar to the natural environment in which the crows live. [6] The study differentiated between 'leader' crows who were knowledgeable about the food site from Day 1, as well as 'followers', who roosted overnight with leaders, and 'naive' crows who did not roost overnight with a leader or visit the food site on Day 1. [6] Notably, they found that compared to naive individuals, follower crows which had not visited the food patch on Day 1 were significantly more likely to visit the patch on Day 2 if they roosted overnight with a leader crow familiar with the food patch, but only if the leader crow returned on Day 2 as well. [6] This indicated that the crows who were unfamiliar with the food patch received information from the leader crows regarding their foraging success, and then followed them to the location the following day. [6] This is supported when compared to the naive individuals who did not roost overnight with the leader, and had significantly lower levels of finding the food source on Day 2. [6]

In vultures

A Griffon vulture landing Griffon vulture landing.jpg
A Griffon vulture landing

Studies of the information centre hypothesis have been conducted using the Eurasian griffon vulture ( Gyps fulvus ) as a test species, due to their communal roosts which may function primarily as information centres. [5] In a study by Harel et al. (2017), movements and behaviour of approximately 200 Eurasian griffon vultures were recorded over a five-year period. [5] This study categorized individual vultures as either 'uninformed', indicating they had no knowledge of a currently available food source, or 'informed', if they had either been at the food source or flown directly over it in the prior two days. [5] Study results showed that uninformed vultures followed informed vultures to successful food sources and thereby gained access to these resources. [5] In addition, a dyad composed of an informed and an uninformed vulture who departed the roost within two minutes of each other, spent a greater amount of airtime at a spatially closer distance than individuals who left the roost on their own, indicating a follow-the-leader relationship. [5]

Further studies have been conducted using other vulture species, such as black vultures ( Coragyps atratus ) and turkey vultures ( Cathartes aura ), with results both supporting and refuting the information centre hypothesis. [3] For example, a study by Neil Buckley (1997), black vultures were observed to benefit from communal roosting because they located food by following knowledgeable conspecifics who had previously visited the carcass food source. [3] In the same study, communal benefits as in the black vulture were not observed for the turkey vulture individuals. [3]

Criticism

After its creation in 1973, the information centre hypothesis gained popularity, and with this popularity came criticism. [10] The information centre hypothesis has faced criticism regarding its assumptions and views that the primary purpose of communal roosting is to share information regarding the location of food sources and for unsuccessful individuals to follow successful individuals back to the location. Mock et al., argue that there are other reasons for the communal roosting of birds, such as anti-predator strategies. [3] Multiple studies have found that there was not one primary cause of communal roost development, but that other factors were equally important in the evolution of communal roosting behaviour. [4] [10] A further criticism states that the information centre hypothesis is not valid because it does not represent an evolutionarily stable strategy (ESS). [4]

According to Heinz Richner and Philipp Heeb (1995), the primary issue with the information centre hypothesis is the concept that a successful forager would return to the roost to help other, unsuccessful individuals. [10] They argue that this issue cannot be solved without making assumptions regarding kin benefits, and thus the hypothesis cannot be confirmed to be true. [10] In addition, they note that the information centre hypothesis, as it was originally proposed by Ward and Zahavi, requires the assumption that individuals fluctuate between being leaders and followers, and therefore relies on altruism between individuals. [10] Other literature also criticizes this assumption made in the original hypothesis. [5]

Other studies have found that the information centre hypothesis lays a correct framework for the communal roosting of some species, but should be broadened to include aspects beyond resource knowledge sharing, such as information regarding mates and predators. [4] A review paper by Bijleveld et al. (2009) suggests that broadening the hypothesis to include these other information sharing possibilities better explains the phenomenon of communal roosting. [4] For example, Ward and Zahavi argued that a dramatic aerial display by a bird was an advertisement to others regarding their knowledge of a food source. [1] However, there may be broader implications that the original ICH allows for, such as the advertisement acting as an individual signal of quality to increase the advertising individuals chance of obtaining a high quality mate. [4] This example supports the broadening of the hypothesis on the basis that more information than just food resource location is being shared.

Related Research Articles

Torresian crow

The Torresian crow, also called the Australian crow or Papuan crow, is a passerine bird in the crow family native to the north and west of Australia and nearby islands in Indonesia and Papua New Guinea. The species has a black plumage, beak and mouth with white irises. The base of the feathers on the head and neck are white. The Torresian crow is slightly larger with a more robust bill than the morphologically similar little crow.

House crow

The house crow, also known as the Indian, greynecked, Ceylon or Colombo crow, is a common bird of the crow family that is of Asian origin but now found in many parts of the world, where they arrived assisted by shipping. It is between the jackdaw and the carrion crow in size but is slimmer than either. The forehead, crown, throat and upper breast are a richly glossed black, whilst the neck and breast are a lighter grey-brown in colour. The wings, tail and legs are black. There are regional variations in the thickness of the bill and the depth of colour in areas of the plumage.

Foraging Searching for wild food resources

Foraging is searching for wild food resources. It affects an animal's fitness because it plays an important role in an animal's ability to survive and reproduce. Foraging theory is a branch of behavioral ecology that studies the foraging behavior of animals in response to the environment where the animal lives.

Amotz Zahavi

Amotz Zahavi was an Israeli evolutionary biologist, a Professor in the Department of Zoology at Tel Aviv University, and one of the founders of the Society for the Protection of Nature in Israel. His main work concerned the evolution of signals, particularly those signals that are indicative of fitness, and their selection for "honesty".

Scaly-breasted munia

The scaly-breasted munia or spotted munia, known in the pet trade as nutmeg mannikin or spice finch, is a sparrow-sized estrildid finch native to tropical Asia. A species of the genus Lonchura, it was formally described and named by Carl Linnaeus in 1758. Its name is based on the distinct scale-like feather markings on the breast and belly. The adult is brown above and has a dark conical bill. The species has 11 subspecies across their range and differ slightly in size and colour.

Herd

A herd is a social group of certain animals of the same species, either wild or domestic. The form of collective animal behavior associated with this is referred to as herding.

Signalling theory Theory of animal signalling for evolutionary advantage

Within evolutionary biology, signalling theory is a body of theoretical work examining communication between individuals, both within species and across species. It is related to, but not equivalent with, the field of biosemiotics. The central question is when organisms with conflicting interests, such as in sexual selection, should be expected to provide honest signals rather than cheating. Mathematical models describe how signalling can contribute to an evolutionarily stable strategy.

Red-billed quelea A small, migratory weaver bird native to Sub-Saharan Africa

The red-billed quelea, also known as the red-billed weaver or red-billed dioch, is a small—approximately 12 cm (4.7 in) long and weighing 15–26 g (0.53–0.92 oz)—migratory, sparrow-like bird of the weaver family, Ploceidae, native to Sub-Saharan Africa.

Greater noctule bat

The greater noctule bat is a rare carnivorous bat found in Europe, West Asia, and North Africa. It is the largest and least studied bat in Europe with a wingspan of up to 46 centimetres (18 in) and is one of the few bat species to feed on passerine birds. Greater noctule bats are the only bat species to hunt birds on the wing rather than when roosting. The greater noctule bat has wings adapted for open-air hunting and uses echolocation frequencies above the hearing range of birds.

Flock (birds)

A flock is a gathering of a group of same species animals in order to forage or travel with one another. In avians flocks are typically seen in association with migration. While this is true it can also be seen that flocking is important in safety from predation and foraging benefits. Living in a flock can also come at a cost to the birds living within it.

Mobbing (animal behavior)

Mobbing in animals is an antipredator adaptation in which individuals of prey species mob a predator by cooperatively attacking or harassing it, usually to protect their offspring. A simple definition of mobbing is an assemblage of individuals around a potentially dangerous predator. This is most frequently seen in birds, though it is also known to occur in many other animals such as the meerkat and some bovines. While mobbing has evolved independently in many species, it only tends to be present in those whose young are frequently preyed upon. This behavior may complement cryptic adaptations in the offspring themselves, such as camouflage and hiding. Mobbing calls may be used to summon nearby individuals to cooperate in the attack.

Bird colony

A bird colony is a large congregation of individuals of one or more species of bird that nest or roost in proximity at a particular location. Many kinds of birds are known to congregate in groups of varying size; a congregation of nesting birds is called a breeding colony. Colonial nesting birds include seabirds such as auks and albatrosses; wetland species such as herons; and a few passerines such as weaverbirds, certain blackbirds, and some swallows. A group of birds congregating for rest is called a communal roost. Evidence of colonial nesting has been found in non-neornithine birds (Enantiornithes), in sediments from the Late Cretaceous (Maastrichtian) of Romania.

Chestnut-crowned babbler

The chestnut-crowned babbler is a medium-sized bird that is endemic to arid and semi-arid areas of south-eastern Australia. It is a member of the family Pomatostomidae, which comprises five species of Australo-Papuan babblers. All are boisterous and highly social, living in groups of up to 23 individuals that forage and breed communally. Other names include red-capped babbler, rufous-crowned babbler and chatterer.

Grey-breasted woodpecker Species of bird

The grey-breasted woodpecker is a species of bird in the family Picidae. It is endemic to the interior of southwestern Mexico.

Communal roosting

Communal roosting is an animal behavior where a group of individuals, typically of the same species, congregate in an area for a few hours based on an external signal and will return to the same site with the reappearance of the signal. Environmental signals are often responsible for this grouping, including nightfall, high tide, or rainfall. The distinction between communal roosting and cooperative breeding is the absence of chicks in communal roosts. While communal roosting is generally observed in birds, the behavior has also been seen in bats, primates, and insects. The size of these roosts can measure in the thousands to millions of individuals, especially among avian species.

Social facilitation in animals

Social facilitation in animals is when the performance of a behaviour by an animal increases the probability of other animals also engaging in that behaviour or increasing the intensity of the behaviour. More technically, it is said to occur when the performance of an instinctive pattern of behaviour by an individual acts as a releaser for the same behaviour in others, and so initiates the same line of action in the whole group. It has been phrased as "The energizing of dominant behaviors by the presence of others."

Social learning refers to learning that is facilitated by observation of, or interaction with, another animal or its products. Social learning has been observed in a variety of animal taxa, such as insects, fish, birds, reptiles, amphibians and mammals.

Vigilance, in the field of behavioural ecology, refers to an animal's examination of its surroundings in order to heighten awareness of predator presence. Vigilance is an important behaviour during foraging as animals must often venture away from the safety of shelter to find food. However being vigilant comes at the expense of time spent feeding so there is a trade-off between the two. The length of time animals devote to vigilance is dependent on many factors including predation risk and hunger.

Allofeeding

Allofeeding is a type of food sharing behaviour observed in cooperatively breeding species of birds. Allofeeding refers to a parent, sibling or unrelated adult bird feeding altricial hatchlings, which are dependent on parental care for their survival. Allofeeding also refers to food sharing between adults of the same species. Allofeeding can occur between mates during mating rituals, courtship, egg laying or incubation, between peers of the same species, or as a form of parental care.

Avian foraging

Avian foraging refers to the range of activities and behaviours exhibited by birds in their quest for food. In addition to their unique body adaptations, birds have a range of described behaviours that differ from the foraging behaviours of other animal groups. According to the foraging habitat, birds may be grouped into foraging guilds. Foraging includes a range of activities, starting with the search for food, making use of sensory abilities, and which may involve one or more birds either of a single or even of multiple species. This is followed by locomotion and movements to obtain or capture the food, followed by the processing or handling of the foods prior to ingestion. Like all organisms foraging entails balancing the energy spent and energy gained. The high metabolic rate of birds, among the highest in the homoeotherm groups, constrains them to ensure a net positive gain in energy and have led evolutionary ethologists to develop the idea of optimal foraging.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Ward, P.; Zahavi, A. (1973-10-01). "The Importance of Certain Assemblages of Birds as "information-Centres" for Food-Finding". Ibis. 115 (4): 517–534. doi:10.1111/j.1474-919x.1973.tb01990.x. ISSN   1474-919X.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Mock, Douglas W.; Lamey, Timothy C.; Thompson, Desmond B. A. (1988). "Falsifiability+3.0. and the Information Centre Hypothesis". Ornis Scandinavica (Scandinavian Journal of Ornithology). 19 (3): 231–248. doi:10.2307/3676564. JSTOR   3676564.
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 Buckley, Neil J. (1997-10-01). "Experimental tests of the information-center hypothesis with black vultures (Coragypsatratus) and turkey vultures (Cathartesaura)". Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 41 (4): 267–279. doi:10.1007/s002650050388. ISSN   0340-5443. S2CID   37716480.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Bijleveld, Allert I.; Egas, Martijn; Van Gils, Jan A.; Piersma, Theunis (2010-02-01). "Beyond the information centre hypothesis: communal roosting for information on food, predators, travel companions and mates?". Oikos. 119 (2): 277–285. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0706.2009.17892.x. ISSN   1600-0706.
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Harel, Roi; Spiegel, Orr; Getz, Wayne M.; Nathan, Ran (2017-04-12). "Social foraging and individual consistency in following behaviour: testing the information centre hypothesis in free-ranging vultures". Proc. R. Soc. B. 284 (1852): 20162654. doi:10.1098/rspb.2016.2654. ISSN   0962-8452. PMC   5394657 . PMID   28404771.
  6. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Sonerud, G. A.; Smedshaug, C. A.; Bråthen, Ø (2001-04-22). "Ignorant hooded crows follow knowledgeable roost-mates to food: support for the information centre hypothesis". Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences. 268 (1469): 827–831. doi:10.1098/rspb.2001.1586. ISSN   0962-8452. PMC   1088676 . PMID   11345328.
  7. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Ward, Peter; Zahavi, Amotz (1973). "The importance of certain assemblages of birds as "Information -Centres" for food finding". Ibis. 115 (4): 517–534. doi:10.1111/j.1474-919x.1973.tb01990.x.
  8. Richner, Heinz; Heeb, Philipp (1996). "Communal Life: Honest Signaling and the Recruitment Center Hypothesis". Behavioral Ecology. 7 (1): 115–18. doi: 10.1093/beheco/7.1.115 .
  9. 1 2 Mock, Douglas W., Timothy C. Lamey and Desmond B. A. Thompson. "Falsifiability and the Information Centre Hypothesis." Ornis Scandinavica 19.3 (1988): 231-248.
  10. 1 2 3 4 5 Richner, Heinz; Heeb, Philipp (1995). Is the Information Center Hypothesis a Flop?. Advances in the Study of Behavior. 24. pp. 1–45. doi:10.1016/s0065-3454(08)60391-5. ISBN   9780120045242.