Status Signaling in Harris Sparrows: Some Experiments in Deception
Status Signaling in Harris Sparrows: Some Experiments in Deception
复制标题
哈里斯麻雀的状态信号：一些欺骗实验
DOI：
10.1163/156853977x00504
复制
发表时间：
1977
期刊：
影响因子：
1.3
通讯作者：
S. Rohwer
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Rohwer
(1)哈里斯麻雀通过它们头顶和喉咙上的黑色羽毛数量的变化来表明它们的社会统治地位。通过染色和漂白吸引到诱饵站的群体中的一些自由放养的个体，实验研究了个体在这种状态信号系统上作弊的潜在能力。正如我们详细讨论的那样，作弊是一个理论上很重要的问题，因为生存研究表明，从属者在冬季生存的可能性比支配者要小得多。如果是真的，这将导致对优势羽毛类型的强烈定向选择。(2)除了一个例外，那些被染色以模仿冬季等级最高的鸟类的下属都受到了合法研究者的迫害。唯一的例外是一只在秋季换羽时明显低估了自己地位的鸟，而此时正是合适的羽毛信号产生的时候。(3)漂白鸟被迫争取更多的地位，因为戏剧。一只白化鸟和一只等级稍低的正常鸟之间的第一次相遇就证明了这一点。最后，漂白的鸟表现得好像周围的所有人都被认为是不尊重的，并且以异常高的频率专横地攻击鸟类。(4)虽然这些数据有力地表明作弊是社会控制的，但这样的社会组织提出了一些复杂的进化问题。对于这种明显的社会控制的欺骗行为，另一种解释是，在我的操纵下观察到的不寻常行为仅仅代表了对冬季资源的正常防御。这种解释要求冬季优势相互作用的速率由（1）攻击的风险和（2）资源防御的重要性控制。如果这是真的，染色的鸟可能看起来生病了，因为没有激素控制伴随着他们的染色;因此，他们可能受到更多的攻击，因为感知风险降低，潜在收益高（在他倒下的时候打他）。同样地，白化鸟可能变得异常具有攻击性，因为低等级鸟的接近向它们表明，需要更积极地防御资源。区分这些假设的实验尚未进行。
(1) Harris Sparrows signal their social dominance status by variations in the amount of black feathering on their crowns and throat. The potential ability of individuals to cheat on such a status signaling system was experimentally investigated by dyeing and bleaching some free-ranging individuals in a flock attracted to a bait station. As discussed in detail, cheating is a theoretically important problem because survival studies have shown subordinates to be much less likely to survive over winter than dominants. If true, this should result in strong directional selection toward the dominant plumage type. (2) Subordinates dyed to mimic the highest ranking birds of the winter hierarchy were, with but one exception, persecuted by the legitimate studlies. The single exception was apparently a bird which had underestimated his status during the fall molt when the appropriate plumage signal is produced. (3) Bleached birds were forced to fight much more for their status, as dramati. cally shown by what was likely the first encounter between a bleached bird and a normal individual of just slightly lower rank. Eventually the bleached birds behaved as though all others around them were perceived as disrespectful, and despotically attacked birds at an abnormally high rate. (4) While these data strongly suggest that cheating is socially controlled, such a social organization raises some complex evolutionary issues. An alternative explanation of the apparent social control of cheating is that the unusual behavior observed in response to my manipulations merely represented normal defense of winter resources. This explanation requires that the rate of winter dominance inter-actions be controlled by (1) the risk of attack, and (2) the importance of resource defense. If this is true, the dyed birds may have appeared sick since no hormonal manipulation accompanied their dyeing; thus they may have been attacked more because perceived risk was down and potential gain high (beat the toughy while he is down). Likewise, the bleached birds may have become unusually aggressive because the closer approach of low ranked birds suggested to them that a much more active defense of resources was required. Experiments distinguishing these hypothesis have not yet been performed.