Egg Recognition in Japanese Quail

Abstract

Egg recognition allows birds to reduce the costs of heterospecific or conspecific nest parasitism, by allowing them to reject foreign eggs or abandon parasitised clutches. However, the precise phenotypic characteristics of eggs that are recognised and compared are not well understood. Using Japanese quail (Coturnix japonica), which exhibit extremely high between-female and low within-female variation in egg colour, maculation patterns and shape, I show that females can learn to recognise the salient characteristics of eggs from a given clutch (not necessarily their own) and can use this learned template to discriminate against foreign eggs with a high probability when the eggs are phenotypically distinct. Specifically, female quail appear to use both maculation pattern and, to a lesser extent, egg shape to make these decisions. These findings are discussed with respect to cognitive mechanisms of egg recognition.

Keywords

egg recognition maculation phenotypic variation avian visual model Japanese quail

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bertram

B.C.R.

(1979) Ostriches recognise their own eggs and discard others. Nature, 279, 233-234.

Bowmaker

J.K.

, Kovach

J.K.

, Whitmore

A.V.

and Loew

E.R.

(1993) Visual pigments and oil droplets in genetically manipulated and carotenoid deprived quail: a microspectrophotometric study. Vision Res., 33, 571-578.

de Brooke

and Davies

N.B.

(1988) Egg mimicry by Cuckoos Cuculus canorus in relation to discrimination by hosts. Nature, 335, 630-632.

Cramp

and Simmons

K.E.L.

(1980) Birds of the Western Palearctic, Vol. 2. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.

Crawley

M.J.

(2002) Statistical computing: an introduction to data analysis using S-Plus. Wiley, Chichester, UK.

Good

P.I.

(2005) Permutation, parametric and bootstrap tests of hypotheses, 3rd edn. Springer, NY, USA.

Gorchein

, Lord

and Lim

C.K.

(2011) Isolation and characterization of free haem from the shell gland of quail and hen. Biomed. Chromatog. (doi: 10.1002/bmc.1665).

Hanlon

R.T.

, Forsythe

J.W.

and Joneschild

D.E.

(1999) Crypsis, conspicuousness, mimicry and polyphenism as antipredator defences of foraging octopuses on Indo-Pacific coral reefs, with a method of quantifying crypsis from video tapes. Biol. J. Linn. Soc., 66, 1-22.

Hart

N.S.

(2002) Vision in the peafowl (Aves: Pavo cristatus). J. Exp. Biol., 205, 3925-3935.

10.

Hauber

M.E.

and Sherman

P.W.

(2001) Self-referent phenotype matching: theoretical considerations and empirical evidence. Trends Neurosci., 24, 609-616.

11.

Hauber

M.E.

, Moskát

and Bán

(2006) Experimental shift in hosts’ acceptance threshold of inaccurate-mimic brood parasite eggs. Biol. Lett., 2, 177-180.

12.

Jones

C.D.

and Osorio

(2004) Discrimination of orientated visual textures by poultry chicks. Vis. Res., 44, 83-89.

13.

Kennedy

G.Y.

and Vevers

H.G.

(1976) A survey of avian eggshell pigments. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. B, 55, 117-123.

14.

Lotem

, Nakamura

and Zahavi

(1995) Constraints on egg discrimination and cuckoo-host co-evolution. Anim. Behav., 49, 1185-1209.

15.

López-de-Hierro

D.M.

and Moreno-Rueda

(2009) Egg-spot pattern rather than egg colour affects conspecific egg rejection in the house sparrow (Passer domesticus). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 64, 317-324.

16.

Lyon

B.E.

(2003) Egg recognition and counting reduce costs of avian conspecific brood parasitism. Nature, 422, 495-499.

17.

Lyon

(2007) Mechanism of egg recognition in defenses against conspecific brood parasitism: American coots (Fulica Americana) know their own eggs. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 61, 455-463.

18.

Mänd

, Nigul

and Sein

(1986) Oomorphology: a new method. Auk, 103, 613-617.

19.

McCamy

C.S.

, Marcus

and Davidson

J.G.

(1976) A color-rendition chart. J. App. Photograph. Eng., 11, 95-99.

20.

Moksnes

(1992) Egg recognition in chaffinches and bramblings. Anim. Behav., 44, 993-995.

21.

Moskát

and Hauber

M.E.

(2007) Conflict between egg recognition and rejection decisions in common cuckoo (Cuculus canorus) hosts. Anim. Cogn., 10, 377-386.

22.

Moskát

, Bán

, Székely

, Komdeur

, Lucassen

R.W.G.

, van Boheemen

L.A.

and Hauber

M.E.

(2010) Discordancy or template-based recognition? Dissecting the cognitive basis of the rejection of foreign eggs in hosts of avian brood parasites. J. Exp. Biol., 213, 1976-1983.

23.

Mumme

R.L.

, Koenig

W.D.

and Pitelka

F.A.

(1983) Reproductive competition in the communal acorn woodpecker-sisters destroy each others’ eggs. Nature, 306, 583-584

24.

Osorio

and Vorobyev

(2005) Photoreceptor spectral sensitivities in terrestrial animals: adaptations for luminance and colour vision. Proc. R. Soc. B, 272, 1745-1752.

25.

Otsu

(1979) A threshold selection method from gray-level histograms. IEEE Trans. Sys. Man. Cyber., 9, 62-66.

26.

Petrie

, Pinxten

and Eens

(2009) Moorhens have an internal representation of their own eggs. Naturwissenschaften, 96, 405-407.

27.

Pike

T.W.

(2011) Using digital cameras to investigate animal colouration: estimating sensor sensitivity functions. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 65, 849-858.

28.

Rothstein

S.I.

(1974) Mechanisms of avian egg recognition: possible learned and innate factors. Auk, 91, 796-807.

29.

Rothstein

S.I.

(1975) Mechanisms of avian egg recognition: do birds know their own eggs? Anim. Behav., 23, 268-278.

30.

Rothstein

S.I.

(1990) A model system for coevolution-avian brood parasitism. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst., 21, 481-508.

31.

Sezer

and Tekelioglu

(2009) Quantification of Japanese quail eggshell colour by image analysis. Biol. Res., 42, 99-105.

32.

Sherman

P.W.

, Reeve

H.K.

and Pfennig

D.W.

(1997) Recognition systems, In: Krebs

J.R.

and Davies

N.B.

(eds), Behavioural Ecology, 4th edn, pp. 69–96. Blackwell, Oxford.

33.

Soler

and Møller

A.P.

(1990) Duration of sympatry and coevolution between the great spotted cuckoo and its magpie host. Nature, 343, 1-3.

34.

Spottiswoode

C.N.

and Stevens

(2010) Visual modeling shows that avian host parents use multiple visual cues in rejecting parasitic eggs. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 107, 8672-8676.

35.

Spottiswoode

C.N.

and Stevens

(2011) How to evade a coevolving brood parasite: egg discrimination versus egg variability as host defence. Proc. R. Soc. B, doi: 10.1098/rspb.2011.0401.

36.

Stevens

(2011) Avian vision and egg coloration: concepts and measurements. Avian Biol. Res., 4, 168-184.

37.

Stevens

, Párraga

, Cuthill

I.C.

, Partridge

J.C.

and Troscianko

(2007) Using digital photography to study animal coloration. Biol. J. Linn. Soc., 90, 211-237.

38.

Stoddard

M.C.

and Stevens

(2010) Pattern mimicry of host eggs by the common cuckoo, as seen through a bird's eye. Proc. R. Soc. B, 277, 1387-1393.

39.

Underwood

T.J.

and Sealy

S.G.

(2002) Adaptive significance of egg colouration. In: Deeming

D.C.

(ed.), Avian incubation: behaviour, environment and evolution, pp. 280–298. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

40.

Victoria

J.K.

(1972) Clutch characteristics and egg discriminative ability of the African weaverbird. Ploceus cucullatus Ibis, 114, 367-376.

41.

Yom-Tov

(2001) An updated list and some comments on the occurrence of intraspecific nest parasitism in birds. Ibis, 143, 133-143.