• 首页关于本刊期刊订阅编委会作者指南过刊浏览
李成安,韩梅,张雷,赵济川,殷江霞,万冬梅.2016.杂色山雀的反盗食贮食策略.动物学杂志,51(2):198-206.
杂色山雀的反盗食贮食策略
Pilferage Avoidance of Varied Tit, Parus various in the presence of Intra- and Inter-specific Competitors
投稿时间:2015-08-22  修订日期:2016-02-24
DOI:DOI: 10.13859/j.cjz.201602005
中文关键词:  杂色山雀  分散储食  被盗风险区  反盗食
英文关键词:Parus varius  Scattered food storage  Stolen risk area  Anti-stolen food
基金项目:国家自然科学基金资助项目,No:31071927;
作者单位E-mail
李成安 辽宁大学生命科学院 774847196@qq.com 
韩梅 辽宁大学生命科学院  
张雷 辽宁大学生命科学院  
赵济川 辽宁大学生命科学院  
殷江霞 辽宁大学生命科学院  
万冬梅 辽宁大学生命科学院 wandongmei@lnu.edu.cn 
摘要点击次数: 1300
全文下载次数: 1489
中文摘要:
      盗食现象在贮食动物中非常普遍,种内竞争者或种间竞争者的盗食是贮藏食物丢失的主要原因之一,同时也是贮食动物贮食行为不断进化的重要选择压力,开展反盗食贮食策略的研究有助于阐释贮食行为进化的原因和对贮食鸟类的保护。杂色山雀(Parus varius)秋季有明显的贮食行为,贮食方式为分散贮食。通过人为投食的方法,以投食点为中心,根据贮食点距投食点距离远近设定了被盗高风险区、被盗中风险区和被盗低风险区,研究个体杂色山雀在无潜在盗食者和有潜在盗食者的情况下,在上述3个风险区贮食比例的变化,探讨个体杂色山雀基于自身以及周围环境条件,在权衡取食及贮藏过程中时间及能量的花费和收益后,其反盗食贮食策略的选择。40只个体杂色山雀贮食策略的统计结果表明,不论潜在盗食者出现与否,个体杂色山雀贮食的总体趋势大致相同,即主要将食物贮藏在中风险区,而高风险区和低风险区贮食比例较低;分别将种间和种内潜在盗食者出现的情况下,个体杂色山雀在各贮食风险区的贮食策略与无潜在盗食者时,个体杂色山雀在各贮食风险区的贮食策略作比较发现:种间及种内潜在盗食者的出现,都会引起被盗高风险区贮食比例降低(种间潜在盗食者:F = 3.174, P < 0.05;种内潜在盗食者:F = 90.475, P < 0.05),低风险区贮食比例上升(种间潜在盗食者:F=220.440, P<0.05;种内潜在盗食者:F=15.651, p<0.05);但种间潜在盗食者出现时,个体杂色山雀在被盗中风险区的贮食比例降低(F=143.749, P<0.05),而种内潜在盗食者出现时,个体杂色山雀在被盗中风险区贮食比例不变(F=0.776, P>0.05),即个体杂色山雀对种间潜在盗食者的出现更加敏感,防范盗食的投入更大。此外分别比较无潜在盗食者,有种间潜在盗食者,和有种内潜在盗食者存在的情况下,雌雄个体杂色山雀在各贮食风险区的反盗食贮食策略,发现其结果也明显不同。无潜在盗食者和种内潜在盗食者出现时,雄性个体杂色山雀为预防灾难性盗食发生而付出的努力较雌性个体高(无潜在盗食者:高风险区 t=4.962, df=16.546, P<0.05;中风险区 t=-0.89, df=29.255, P>0.05; 低风险区 t=-2.166, df=30, p<0.05)(种内潜在盗食者:高风险区 t=-0.152, df=29, P>0.05 ;中风险区 t=2.352, df=19.568, P<0.05;低风险区 t=-2.287, df=19.563, P<0.05);种间潜在盗食者出现时,雌雄个体杂色山雀反盗食贮食策略趋于一致(高风险区 t=1.361, df=29, P>0.05;中风险区 t=-0.194, df=21.529, P>0.05;低风险区 t=-1.599, df=29, P>0.05),无显著性差异。
英文摘要:
      The phenomenon of stealing food is very common in hoarding food animals. The hoarding food can be stolen by intraspecific or interspecific competitors, which are one of the main reasons for the loss of hoarding foods. Meanwhile, it is the main driving factor for the evolution of selection on the food storage behavior. Consequently, the study on the hoarding food strategy which avoid being stolen would be useful in uncovering the underlying mechanisms for the evolution of the hoarding food behavior,and protecting the hoarding food birds. The Varied Tit has obvious behavior of hoarding food at autumn, and the storage mode is scattered. During October 2014, at liaoning province, dalian, fairy cave national nature reserve (E 122°53′24″ ~ 123°03′30″,N 39°54′00″ ~ 40°03′00″), in the experimental zone, we chose seven appropriate respectively separated greater than 1000 m areas. After that, we artificially placed Korean pine seeds, guided and set up seven fixed varied tits feeding points. Then, with mist net method, we traped varied tits at the fixed feeding points, and released these bird after bird banding and taking the blood. As shown in table 1. In this study, we artificially served the food in seven places and set the food source in the center(The fixed varied tits feeding points). According to the distance from the cache site to the food source, the high pilferage risk area, medium pilferage risk area and low pilferage risk area was divided to study the change of hoarding food ratio of varied tits, according to the presence or absence of potential pilferers. We took into account the time and energy’s costs and profits of feeding and storage process to examine the strategy of varied tits in avoiding being stolen food storage strategy. The results showed that the trend in hoarding food strategy of varied tits was roughly similar whether there was potential thieves prey or not. Foods were mainly stored in the medium pilferage risk area, with the high pilferage risk area and low pilferage risk area storage food ratio was relatively low. The presence of interspecific and intraspecific potential pilferers had different and obvious influence on the hoarding food strategy of varied tits. The presence of interspecific and intraspecific potential pilferers decreased the food storage ratio of high pilferage risk area (interspecific potential pilferers:F=3.174, P<0.05;intraspecific potential pilferers:F=90.475, P<0.05)and increased that of low pilferage risk area (interspecific potential pilferers:F=220.440, P<0.05;intraspecific potential pilferers:F=15.651, p<0.05). Furthermore, when there was interspecific potential pilferers, the food storage ratio of medium pilferage risk area would be lower(F=143.749, P<0.05), but if there was intraspecific potential pilferers, the food storage ratio of medium pilferage risk area would not change(F=0.776, P>0.05). This means that the varied tits recognized and prevented from stealing food of interspecific pilferers more than intraspecific potential pilferers. In addition, in the three different situations, the male and the female varied tits’s hoarding food strategies were obviously different. As shown in table 2. When there was no potential pilferers, and there was intraspecific potential pilferers, the male varied tits would took notice and prevented stealing food more than the females(There was no potential pilferers: high pilferage risk area t=4.962, df=16.546, P<0.05; medium pilferage risk area t=-0.89, df=29.255, P>0.05; low pilferage risk area t=-2.166, df=30, p<0.05);( There was intraspecific potential pilferers: high pilferage risk area t=-0.152, df=29, P>0.05 ; medium pilferage risk area t=2.352, df=19.568, P<0.05; low pilferage risk area t=-2.287, df=19.563, P<0.05).While there was interspecific potential pilferers, the results show that no significant difference was observed in the hoarding food strategy of the male and female varied tits.( high pilferage risk area t=1.361, df=29, P>0.05; medium pilferage risk area t=-0.194, df=21.529, P>0.05; low pilferage risk area t=-1.599, df=29, P>0.05).
附件
查看全文  查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器