Hear no evil: The effect of auditory warning signals on avian innate avoidance, learned avoidance and memory

Many aposematic insect species advertise their toxicity to potential predators using olfactory and auditory signals, in addition to visual signals, to produce a multimodal warning display. The olfactory signals in these displays may have interesting effects, such as eliciting innate avoidance agains...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Emma C. SIDDALL, Nicola M. MARPLES
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Oxford University Press 2011-04-01
Series:Current Zoology
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.currentzoology.org/paperdetail.asp?id=11833
id doaj-be40f5df9979412ca94b85235f43e7fd
record_format Article
spelling doaj-be40f5df9979412ca94b85235f43e7fd2020-11-25T00:38:59ZengOxford University PressCurrent Zoology1674-55072011-04-01572197207Hear no evil: The effect of auditory warning signals on avian innate avoidance, learned avoidance and memoryEmma C. SIDDALL, Nicola M. MARPLESMany aposematic insect species advertise their toxicity to potential predators using olfactory and auditory signals, in addition to visual signals, to produce a multimodal warning display. The olfactory signals in these displays may have interesting effects, such as eliciting innate avoidance against novel colored prey, or improving learning and memory of defended prey. However, little is known about the effects of such ancillary signals when they are auditory rather than olfactory. The few studies that have investigated this question have provided conflicting results. The current study sought to clarify and extend understanding of the effects of prey auditory signals on avian predator responses. The domestic chick Gallus gallus domesticus was used as a model avian predator to examine how the defensive buzzing sound of a bumblebee Bombus terrestris affected the chick’s innate avoidance behavior, and the learning and memory of prey avoidance. The results demonstrate that the buzzing sound had no effect on the predator’s responses to unpalatable aposematically colored crumbs, suggesting that the agitated buzzing of B. terrestris may provide no additional protection from avian predators [Current Zoology 57 (2): 197–207, 2011].http://www.currentzoology.org/paperdetail.asp?id=11833AposematismAuditory signalsDietary conservatismAvoidance learningMemorabilityMultimodal signaling
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Emma C. SIDDALL, Nicola M. MARPLES
spellingShingle Emma C. SIDDALL, Nicola M. MARPLES
Hear no evil: The effect of auditory warning signals on avian innate avoidance, learned avoidance and memory
Current Zoology
Aposematism
Auditory signals
Dietary conservatism
Avoidance learning
Memorability
Multimodal signaling
author_facet Emma C. SIDDALL, Nicola M. MARPLES
author_sort Emma C. SIDDALL, Nicola M. MARPLES
title Hear no evil: The effect of auditory warning signals on avian innate avoidance, learned avoidance and memory
title_short Hear no evil: The effect of auditory warning signals on avian innate avoidance, learned avoidance and memory
title_full Hear no evil: The effect of auditory warning signals on avian innate avoidance, learned avoidance and memory
title_fullStr Hear no evil: The effect of auditory warning signals on avian innate avoidance, learned avoidance and memory
title_full_unstemmed Hear no evil: The effect of auditory warning signals on avian innate avoidance, learned avoidance and memory
title_sort hear no evil: the effect of auditory warning signals on avian innate avoidance, learned avoidance and memory
publisher Oxford University Press
series Current Zoology
issn 1674-5507
publishDate 2011-04-01
description Many aposematic insect species advertise their toxicity to potential predators using olfactory and auditory signals, in addition to visual signals, to produce a multimodal warning display. The olfactory signals in these displays may have interesting effects, such as eliciting innate avoidance against novel colored prey, or improving learning and memory of defended prey. However, little is known about the effects of such ancillary signals when they are auditory rather than olfactory. The few studies that have investigated this question have provided conflicting results. The current study sought to clarify and extend understanding of the effects of prey auditory signals on avian predator responses. The domestic chick Gallus gallus domesticus was used as a model avian predator to examine how the defensive buzzing sound of a bumblebee Bombus terrestris affected the chick’s innate avoidance behavior, and the learning and memory of prey avoidance. The results demonstrate that the buzzing sound had no effect on the predator’s responses to unpalatable aposematically colored crumbs, suggesting that the agitated buzzing of B. terrestris may provide no additional protection from avian predators [Current Zoology 57 (2): 197–207, 2011].
topic Aposematism
Auditory signals
Dietary conservatism
Avoidance learning
Memorability
Multimodal signaling
url http://www.currentzoology.org/paperdetail.asp?id=11833
work_keys_str_mv AT emmacsiddallnicolammarples hearnoeviltheeffectofauditorywarningsignalsonavianinnateavoidancelearnedavoidanceandmemory
_version_ 1725295451214708736