Red-backed shrikes (Lanius collurio) behave quite differently towards two common nest predators. While the European jay (Garrulus glandarius) is commonly attacked, in the presence of the Eurasian magpie (Pica pica), shrikes stay fully passive. We tested the hypotheses that this passive response to the magpie is an alternative defense strategy. Nesting shrikes were exposed to the commonly attacked European kestrel (Falco tinnunculus) in a situation in which i) a harmless domestic pigeon, ii) a commonly attacked European jay, and iii) a non-attacked black-billed magpie are (separately) presented nearby. The kestrel dummy presented together with the magpie dummy was attacked with a significantly lower intensity than when it was presented with the other intruders (pigeon, jay) or alone. This means that the presence of the magpie inhibited the shrike's defense response towards the other intruder. These results support our previous hypotheses that shrikes use an alternative defense strategy in the magpie's presence. We hypothesize that the magpie is able to associate the active defense of the shrikes with the close proximity of a nest and that shrikes try not to draw the magpie's attention to the nest. The reason why this strategy is not used against the jay remains unanswered as jays as well as magpies show very similar cognitive and foraging skills enabling them to individuate the nest presence according to active parental defense.

Department of Ethology Institute of Animal Science Prague Přátelství 815 Prague Uhříněves 10400 Czech Republic

Department of Zoology Faculty of Science Charles University Prague Viničná 1594 7 Praha Nové Město 12800 Czech Republic

Department of Zoology Faculty of Science University of South Bohemia Branišovská 1760 České Budějovice 37005 Czech Republic

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Kelley JL, Magurran AE. Learned predator recognition and antipredator responses in fishes. Fish Fish. 2003;4(3): 216–226.

Caro TM. Antipredator defenses in birds and mammals. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2005.

Treves A. Theory and method in studies of vigilance and aggregation. Anim Behav. 2000;60: 711–722. PubMed

Jacobsen OW, Ugelvik M. Antipredator behaviour of breeding Eurasian wigeon. J Field Ornithol. 1992;63: 324–330.

Dale S, Gustavsen R, Slagsvold T. Risk taking during parental care: A test of three hypotheses applied to the pied flycatcher. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 1996;39: 31–42.

Amat JA, Masero JA. Predation risk on incubating adults constrains the choice of thermally favourable nest sites in a plover. Anim Behav. 2004;67: 293–300.

Hogstad O. Sex-differences in nest defence in Fieldfares Turdus pilaris in relation to their size and physical condition. Ibis. 2005;47: 375–380.

Strnad M, Němec M, Veselý P, Fuchs R. Red-backed shrikes (Lanius collurio) adjust the mobbing intensity, but not mobbing frequency, by assessing the potential threat to themselves from different predators. Ornis Fennica. 2012;89: 206–215.

Lovaszi P, Moskat C. Break-down of arms race between the red-backed shrike (Lanius collurio) and common cuckoo (Cuculus canorus). Behaviour. 2004;141: 245–262.

Tryjanowski P, Golawski A. Sex differences in nest defence by the red-backed shrike Lanius collurio: effects of offspring age, brood size and stage of breeding season. J Ethol. 2004;22: 13–16.

Cramp S, Perrins CM. Handbook of the Birds of Europe the Middle East and North Africa The birds of the Western Palearctic Vol. VIII—Crows to Finches . Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press; 1994.

Curio E, Klump G, Regelmann K. An anti-predator response in the great tit (Parus major): Is it tuned to predator risk? Oecologia. 1983;60: 83–88. PubMed

Reudink MW, Nocera JJ, Curry RL. Anti-predator responses of Neotropical resident and migrant birds to familiar and unfamiliar owl vocalizations on the Yucatan Peninsula. Ornitol Neotrop. 2007;18: 543–552.

Csermely D, Casagrande S, Calimero A. Differential defensive response of common kestrels against a known or unknown predator. Ital J Zool. 2006;73: 125–128.

Lima SL. Nonlethal effects in the ecology of predator-prey interactions. Bioscience. 1998;48: 25–34.

Sih A, Englund G, Wooster D. Emergent impacts of multiple predators on prey. Trends Ecol Evol. 1998;13: 350–355. PubMed

Sih A, Bolnick DI, Luttbeg B, Orrock JL, Peacor SD, Pintor LM et al. Predator–prey naïveté, antipredator behavior, and the ecology of predator invasions. Oikos. 2010;119: 610–621.

Simmons KEL.Distraction-display in the Kentish Plover. Brit Birds. 1951;44: 181–187.

Armstrong EA. The distraction displays of the Little Ringed Plover and territorial competition with the Ringed Plover. Brit Birds. 1952;45: 55–59.

Armstrong EA. Distraction display and the human predator. Ibis. 1956;98: 641–654.

Kilham L. Reproductive Behavior of White-Breasted Nuthatches: I. Distraction Display, Bill-Sweeping, and Nest Hole Defense. Auk. 1968;85: 477–492.

Barash DP. Evolutionary aspects of parental behavior: distraction behavior of the alpine accentor. Wilson Bull. 1975;87: 367–373.

Brunton DH. Fatal antipredator behavior of a Killdeer. Wilson Bull. 1986;98: 605–607.

Byrkjedal I. Antipredator behavior and breeding success in Greater Golden-Plover and Eurasian Dotterel. Condor. 1987;40–47.

Sordahl TA. The risks of avian mobbing and distraction behavior: an anecdotal review. Wilson Bull. 1990;102: 349–352.

Soluk DA, Collins NC. Synergistic interactions between fish and stoneflies: facilitation and interference among stream predators. Oikos. 1988;52: 94–100.

Krupa JJ, Sih A. Fishing spiders, green sunfish, and a stream-dwelling water strider: male-female conflict and prey responses to single versus multiple predator environments. Oecologia. 1998;117: 258–265. PubMed

Ahlgren J, Brönmark C. Fleeing towards death—leech-induced behavioural defences increase freshwater snail susceptibility to predatory fish. Oikos. 2012;121: 1501–1506.

Relyea RA. How prey respond to combined predators: a review and an empirical test. Ecology. 2003;84: 1827–1839.

Birkhead T. The Magpies: The Ecology and Behaviour of Black-billed and Yellow-billed Magpies. London: Academic Press; 1991.

Tatner P. The diet of urban magpies Pica pica. Ibis. 1983;125: 90–107.

Chiron F, Julliard R. Responses of songbirds to magpie reduction in an urban habitat. J Wildlife Manage. 2007;71: 2624–2631.

Šťastný K, Bejček V, Hudec K. Atlas hnízdního rozšíření ptáků v České republice. Praha: Nakladatelství Aventinum; 2006.

Falkenauerová A. Antipredation behavior of the red-backed shrike (Lanius collurio). Bachelor Thesis, University of South Bohemia. 2008. Available: https://wstag.jcu.cz/portal/studium/prohlizeni.html?pc_pagenavigationalstate=H4sIAAAAAAAAAGNgYGBkYDMyMjA2txBmZADxOIpLEktSvVMrwTwRXUsjI2Njc6AKMwtTE3MzC2MTC6AMAwDRBK_4OgAAAA**

Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S. Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. J Stat Softw. 2015;67(1): 1–48.

Burnham K, Anderson D, Huyvaert K. AIC model selection and multimodel inference in behavioral ecology: some background, observations, and comparisons. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 2011;65(1): 23–35.

Schmidt E. Die Sperbergrasmücke: Sylvia nisoria. Ziemsen: Wittenberg Lutherstadt; 1981.

Goodwin D. The reactions of some nesting passerines towards live and stuffed jays. Brit Birds. 1953;6: 193–200.

Skutch AF. Do tropical birds rear as many young as they can nourish? Ibis. 1949;91: 430–455.

Latimer W. A comparative study of the songs and alarm calls of some Parus species. Z Tierpsychol. 1977;45: 414–433.

Shalter MD. Effect of spatial context on the mobbing behaviour of pied flycatchers to a predator model. Anim Behav. 1978;26: 1219–1221.

Klump GM, Shalter MD. Acoustic behaviour of birds and mammals in the predator context. Z Tierpsychol. 1984;66: 189–226.

Yasukawa K. Costs and benefits of a vocal signal: the nestassociated ‘chit’ of the female red-winged blackbird, Agelaius phoeniceus. Anim Behav. 1989;38: 866–874.

Krams I. Communication in crested tits and the risk of predation. Anim Behav. 2001;61: 1065–1068.

Krama T, Krams I. Cost of mobbing call to breeding pied flycatcher, Ficedula hypoleuca. Behav Ecol. 2004;16: 37–40.

Krams I, Krama T, Igaune K, Mänd R. Long-lasting mobbing of the pied flycatcher increases the risk of nest predation. Behav Ecol. 2007;18: 1082–1084.

Weidinger K. Nest predators of woodland open-nesting songbirds in central Europe. Ibis. 2009;151: 352–360.

Förschler M. Predation strategy of the European Jay Garrulus glandarius and antipredator response by the Citril Finch Serinus citronella. Revista Catalana d`Ornitologia. 2002;19: 41–43.

Schaefer T. Video monitoring of shrub-nests reveals nest predators: Capsule Jays Garrulus glandarius are the most common predators, but carnivorous mammals and some other species also predate nests. Bird Study. 2004;51: 170–177.

Klvaňová A, Horáková D, Exnerová A. Nest defence intensity in House Sparrows Passer domesticus in relation to parental quality and brood value. Acta Ornithol. 2011;46: 47–54.

Drachmann J, Broberg MM, Søgaard P. Nest predation and semicolonial breeding in Linnets Carduelis cannabina: Nest predation in Linnets in Denmark was caused mainly by Hooded Crows Corvus corone cornix and Magpies Pica pica with no experimental evidence of antipredator aggression. Bird Study. 2002;49: 35–41.

Holyoak D. A comparative study of the food of some British Corvidae. Bird Study. 1968;15: 147–153.

Krištín A. Nahrungsanspruche der Nestlinge Pica pica L. und Passer montanus L. in der Windbrechern der Schuttinsel. Folia Zool. 1988;37: 343–356.

Møller AP. Nest predation and nest site choice in passerine birds in habitat patches of different size: a study of magpies and blackbirds. Oikos. 1988;53: 215–221.

Groom DW. Magpie Pica pica predation on Blackbird Turdus merula nests in urban areas. Bird Study. 1993;40: 55–62.

Stoate C, Thomson DL. Predation and songbird populations In: Aebischer NJ, Evans AD, Grice PV, Vickery JA, editors. Ecology and Conservation of Lowland Farmland Birds. Tring: British Ornithologists Union; 2000. pp. 134–139.

Gooch S, Baillie SR, Birkhead TR. Magpie Pica pica and songbird populations. Retrospective investigation of trends in population density and breeding success. J. Appl. Ecol. 1991;28: 1068–1086.

Roos S, Pärt T. Nest predators affect spatial dynamics of breeding red-backed shrikes (Lanius collurio). J Anim Ecol. 2004;73: 117–127.

Lefebrve L, Reader SM, Sol D. Brains, Innovations and Evolution in Birds and Primates. Brain Behav Evolut. 2004;63: 233–246. PubMed

Emery NJ, Clayton NS. The mentality of crows—convergent evolution of intelligence in corvids and apes. Science. 2004;306: 1903–1907. PubMed

Zinkivskay A, Nazir F, Smulders TV. What–Where–When memory in magpies (Pica pica) Anim Cogn. 2009; 12: 119–125. 10.1007/s10071-008-0176-x PubMed DOI

Clayton NS, Krebs JR. Memory in food-storing birds: from behaviour to brain. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 1995;5: 149–154. PubMed

Pollok B, Prior H, Güntürkün O. Development of object permanence in food-storing magpies (Pica pica). J Comp Psychol. 2000;114: 148–157. PubMed

Shaw RC, Plotnik JM, Clayton NS. Exclusion in corvids: The performance of food-caching Eurasian jays (Garrulus glandarius). J Comp Psychol. 2013;127: 428 10.1037/a0032010 PubMed DOI

Zucca P, Milos N, Vallortigara G. Piagetian object permanence and its development in Eurasian jays (Garrulus glandarius). Anim Cogn. 2007;10: 243–258. PubMed

Healy SD, Krebs JR. Food storing and the hippocampus in Corvids amount and volume are correlated. P Roy Soc Lond B. 1992;248: 241–245.

Prior H, Schwarz A, Güntürkün O. Mirror-Induced Behavior in the Magpie (Pica pica): Evidence of Self-Recognition. PLoS Biol 2008;6: e202 10.1371/journal.pbio.0060202 PubMed DOI PMC

Holyoak D. Territorial and feeding behaviour of the magpie. Bird study. 1974;21(2): 117–128.

Vines G. A socio-ecology of magpies Pica pica. Ibis. 1981;123: 190–202.

Díaz JA, Asensio B. Effects of group size and distance to protective cover on the vigilance behaviour of Black-billed magpies Pica pica. Bird Study. 1991;38: 38–41.

Lee WY, Lee S, Choe JC, Jablonski PG. Wild birds recognize individual humans: experiments on magpies, Pica pica. Anim Cogn. 2011;14: 817–825. 10.1007/s10071-011-0415-4 PubMed DOI

Cheke LG, Clayton NS. Eurasian jays (Garrulus glandarius) overcome their current desires to anticipate two distinct future needs and plan for them appropriately. Biol Letters. 2012;8: 171–175. PubMed PMC

Shaw RC, Clayton NS. Eurasian jays, Garrulus glandarius, flexibly switch caching and pilfering tactics in response to social context. Anim Behav. 2012;84: 1191–1200.

Shaw RC, Clayton NS. Careful cachers and prying pilferers: Eurasian jays (Garrulus glandarius) limit auditory information available to competitors. P Roy Soc B. 2013;280: 20122238. PubMed PMC

Legg EW, Clayton NS. Eurasian jays (Garrulus glandarius) conceal caches from onlookers. Anim Cogn. 2014;17: 1223–1226. 10.1007/s10071-014-0743-2 PubMed DOI PMC

Andren H. Corvid density and nest predation in relation to forest fragmentation: a landscape perspective. Ecology. 1992;73: 794–804.

Allen TA, Fortin NJ. The evolution of episodic memory. P Natl Acad Sci USA. 2013;110: 10379–10386. PubMed PMC

Skov-Rackette SI, Miller NY, Shettleworth SJ. What-where-when memory in pigeons. J Exp Psychol Anim B. 2006;32: 345–358. PubMed

Yosef R, Pinshaw B. Impaling in true shrikes (Laniidae): A behavioral and ontogenetic perspective. Behav Process. 2005;69: 363–367. PubMed

Morelli F, Bussière R, Goławski A, Tryjanowski P, Yosef R. Saving the best for last: Differential usage of impaled prey by red-backed shrike (Lanius collurio) during the breeding season. Behav Process. 2015;119: 6–13. PubMed

Němec M, Syrová M, Dokoupilová L, Veselý P, Šmilauer P, Landová E et al. Surface texture plays important role in predator recognition by red-backed shrikes in field experiment. Anim. Cogn. 2015; 18: 259–268. 10.1007/s10071-014-0796-2 PubMed DOI

Cowards or clever guys: an alternative nest defence strategy employed by shrikes against magpies

A kestrel without hooked beak and talons is not a kestrel for the red-backed shrike (Lanius collurio)