Experimental tests of a seasonally changing visual preference for habitat in a long‐distance migratory shorebird
Kok, E.M.A.; Hogan, J.A.; Piersma, T. (2020). Experimental tests of a seasonally changing visual preference for habitat in a long‐distance migratory shorebird. Ethology 126(7): 681-693. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/eth.13036 In: Ethology. Wiley-Blackwell: Berlin. ISSN 0179-1613; e-ISSN 1439-0310, more |   |
| Keyword | Calidris canutus (Linnaeus, 1758) [WoRMS]
| | Author keywords | Calidris canutus; circannual rhythms; cognition; memory; migration; motivation |
| Authors | | Top | - Kok, E.M.A., more
- Hogan, J.A.
- Piersma, T., more
| | |
| Abstract | Migratory shorebirds show highly organized seasonal cycles in physiological and morphological traits (body mass and composition, plumage, hormone levels, etc.), which in captivity is accompanied by restless behaviour at times when free‐living birds would start migration. We introduce the idea that seasonally changing preference for habitat could motivate migrants to embark on migration and that this cognitive process could also guide them to seasonally appropriate places. We explored this by testing whether red knots (Calidris canutus), which also in captivity maintain marked circannual phenotypic rhythms, show evidence of seasonal change in preference for pictures of seasonally appropriate habitats. We first developed a method to verify whether red knots are able to memorize and discriminate contrasting pictures projected by LCD projectors. This was followed by two different experiments in which we tested for a seasonally changing preference for breeding or non‐breeding habitat. When carried out during the pre‐breeding season, the red knots are expected to prefer pictures of mudflats, their non‐breeding habitat. At the start of the breeding season, they should prefer pictures of the tundra breeding habitat. We established that knots are able to distinguish and memorize projected images. We failed to demonstrate the predicted change in vision‐based habitat preference, but for reasons of test design we do not interpret this as a strong rejection of the hypothesis. Instead, we suggest that experiments with greater numbers of individuals tested once, perhaps in combination with the provision of additional cues such as smells and sounds, will help the development of these ideas further. |
|
