Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33398622›Full record

ArticleAnimal cognition2021

Parental favoritism in a wild bird population.

Madison Brode, Kelly D Miller, Ashley J Atkins Coleman, Kelly L O'Neil, LeighAnn E Poole, E Keith Bowers

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Animal cognition, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Food supply and provisioning behavior of parents: Are small hoopoe nestlings condemned to die?Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology
    Article
  4. When parents play favorites: brood demand shapes parental preference for offspring UV color.Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Madison BrodeSt. Mary's Episcopal School, Memphis, TN, 38117, USA.
Kelly D MillerDepartment of Biological Sciences, Edward J. Meeman Biological Station, and Center for Biodiversity Research, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, 38152, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9434-2754
Ashley J Atkins ColemanDepartment of Biological Sciences, Edward J. Meeman Biological Station, and Center for Biodiversity Research, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, 38152, USA.
Kelly L O'NeilDepartment of Biological Sciences, Edward J. Meeman Biological Station, and Center for Biodiversity Research, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, 38152, USA.
LeighAnn E PooleDepartment of Biological Sciences, Edward J. Meeman Biological Station, and Center for Biodiversity Research, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, 38152, USA.
E Keith BowersDepartment of Biological Sciences, Edward J. Meeman Biological Station, and Center for Biodiversity Research, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, 38152, USA. ekbowers@memphis.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4488-1463

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In most taxa with altricial young, offspring solicit food from their parents using a combination of visual and acoustic stimuli, but exactly what these young are communicating, and how selection shapes parental responses, remains unresolved. Theory posits that parents' interpretation and response to begging should vary with the likelihood of a return on their investment. We tested this in a wild population of prothonotary warblers (Protonotaria citrea), predicting that parents bias food non-randomly toward certain individuals within their broods depending on both the size and number of offspring. We observed parent-offspring interactions and detected strong dependence between brood size and nestling size in shaping parental responses to begging. Larger siblings were less likely to solicit food during feeding events than their smaller siblings, but they received a disproportionate share from parents in nests containing fewer-than-average young, whereas the smaller-than-average nestlings were disproportionately fed in broods containing a greater-than-average number of young. These findings suggest that parents respond to begging signals according to multiple social cues, favoring the stronger siblings with greater survival prospects when few copies of their genes are present, but overtly favoring runts to ensure whole-brood survival when capable of fledging more young. Future experimental studies may shed light on the contributions of parental decision-making and memory, how young nestlings learn in parent-offspring communication systems, and the adaptive significance of these behaviors.

Indexed as

PasseriformesAnimalsLearningNesting BehaviorBeggingParental investmentParent–offspring communicationSibling rivalrySignal of needSignal of quality

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.