인문학
사회과학
자연과학
공학
의약학
농수해양학
예술체육학
복합학
DBpia AI
AI 에이전트
AI 아이디어
AI 리더
AI 뷰어
Citeasy
크롬 서지관리 다운로드
개인구독
소속 기관이 없으신 경우, 개인 정기구독을 하시면 저렴하게
논문을 무제한 열람 이용할 수 있어요.
지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록·키워드
Prey animals must accurately assess predation risk within their environment. To gather information about this risk, prey animals may personally sample the environment ("personal information") or observe the behavior of congeners ("social information"). Personal information is thought to be more accurate and reliable but may also require more time and energy to acquire. On the other hand, social information, such as alarm calls, tends to be less costly to obtain but may also be less reliable if congeners assess risk differently from one another, or if the information quickly becomes outdated. Theoretical models predict that individuals will differ in how they value personal versus social information. We used previously collected data from a marked population of black-capped chickadees (<i>Poecile atricapillus</i>) to test this prediction. Chickadees were exposed to three different predator cue types: a predator mount (personal information), conspecific mobbing calls (social information), and a combination of both (personal + social information) near feeders established on their territory. We recorded the time it took a chickadee to visit a feeder following cue exposure (i.e., latency to resume feeding) to evaluate individual differences in response to predator cues. Contrary to our prediction, we found no evidence that individuals differed in how they valued personal versus social information about predation risk. Instead, our results suggest that responses to predator cues are state-dependent, with some individuals consistently responding more strongly than others, regardless of cue type. We also found that when chickadees were exposed to a combination of social and personal predator cues, they exhibited higher among-individual variation in latency to resume feeding than when they were exposed to social or personal cues alone. We discuss how individual differences in cue integration (i.e., cue redundancy/equivalence, enhancement, and antagonism) may account for this finding.
인공지능 문자 인식 모델을 통해 추출된 텍스트로, 일부 오타나 오류가 포함될 수 있으나 지속적으로 개선 중입니다.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
최근 본 자료 전체보기
