The evolution of enclosed nesting in passerines is shaped by competition, energetic costs, and predation threat

Karina Vanadzina* (Corresponding Author), Sally e Street, Catherine Sheard

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Many avian species breed in enclosed nests that may provide better protection against predation and climatic conditions compared to open nests and are generally associated with larger clutch sizes and slower offspring growth. Here we show that different enclosed nesting strategies are each linked to behaviors with very different costs and benefits on a macroevolutionary scale. Using a detailed dataset of nest structure and location from the order Passeriformes, we employed phylogenetic comparative methods to evaluate (1) how predation, competition, design complexity, and energetic costs have shaped evolutionary transitions between different nesting strategies, and (2) whether these strategies also have distinct relationships with life-history traits. We find that flexible strategies (i.e., nesting in both open and enclosed sites) as well as energetically demanding strategies are evolutionarily unstable, indicating the presence of underlying ecological tradeoffs between antipredator protections, construction costs, and competition. We confirm that species with enclosed nests have larger clutch sizes and longer development and nestling periods compared to open nesters, but only species that construct enclosed nests rather than compete for preexisting cavities spend more time incubating and are concentrated in the tropics. Flexible strategies prevail in seasonal environments and are linked to larger clutches—but not longer development—compared to nesting in the open. Overall, our results suggest that predation, competition, and energetic costs affect the evolution of nesting strategies, but via distinct pathways, and that caution is warranted when generalizing about the functions of enclosed nest designs in birds.
Original languageEnglish
Article numberukad048
Number of pages15
JournalOrnithology
Volume141
Issue number1
Early online date11 Sept 2023
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 12 Jan 2024

Bibliographical note

Acknowledgments
We would like to acknowledge the immense data collection efforts by the contributors to the ornithological handbooks used as the basis for our analyses. We are very grateful to the reviewers and editors whose thorough suggestions improved the quality and clarity of this work. We thank Camille Troisi, Andrew Clark, Sue Healy, Kevin Lala, Antonia Yovcheva and Alexis Tréboal for help with initial data collection and Mike Webster, Graeme Ruxton and Isabella Capellini for comments on an earlier version of this manuscript. We also thank Macaulay Library at the Cornell Lab of Ornithology for permission to use their nest photos.
Funding statement
This research was supported by funding from the John Templeton Foundation (#60501) and the European Research Council (#788203). KV was additionally supported by I.3.4 Action of the Excellence Initiative—Research University Program at the University of Warsaw, funded by the Ministry of Education and Science, Poland.

Data Availability Statement

Analyses reported in this article can be reproduced using the data provided by Vanadzina et al. (2023b).

Keywords

  • cavity nests
  • competition
  • domed nests
  • enclosed nests
  • life history
  • macroevolution
  • nest-building
  • predation

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The evolution of enclosed nesting in passerines is shaped by competition, energetic costs, and predation threat'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this