close
Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 1990;21(2):87-100.
doi: 10.1002/ajp.1350210203.

Mixed flocks and polyspecific associations: Costs and benefits of mixed groups to birds and monkeys

Affiliations

Mixed flocks and polyspecific associations: Costs and benefits of mixed groups to birds and monkeys

John Terborgh. Am J Primatol. 1990.

Abstract

This review examines the diversity of avian mixed foraging flocks with the goal of relating the conclusions to primate polyspecific associations. Mixed associations are considered as adaptations for achieving an optimal balance between predator protection and feeding efficiency. In open habitat, predator and prey are able to detect each other at a distance and feeding competition is low, especially in species that subsist on a homogeneously distributed food supply. These conditions favor large groups of variable composition. In closed habitats, predators attack at close range, so early warning alarm systems are at a premium. Feeding competition is often intense because food resources such as fruit, flushing leaves, and nectar are spatially concentrated. Since feeding competition is generally less between than within species, these conditions favor mixed associations composed of small numbers of several to many species, and the evolution of elaborate early warning systems to thwart predators. The primate polyspecific associations that have been studied to date share characteristics with the closed habitat model while exhibiting some important distinctions. Primate associations are made up of integral troops, not individuals, implying high incremental costs of joining. These costs, plus a paucity of ecologically compatible combinations of species, seem to limit primate polyspecific associations geographically to regions in which the presence of monkey-eating raptors provides a strong incentive for aggregation.

Keywords: bird; confusion effect; feeding competition; mixed flock; optimal group size; polyspecific association; predator evasion; primate; safety in numbers.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Alevizon, W. S. Mixed schooling and its possible significance in a tropical western Atlantic parrotfish and sturgeon fish. Copeia: 796–798, 1976.
    1. Bertram, B. C. Living in groups. Pp. 64–96 in Behavioural Ecology. J. R. Krebs and N. B. Davies, eds. Sunderland, MA, Sinauer Associates, 1978.
    1. Bertram, B. C. Vigilance and group size in ostriches. Animal Behaviour 28: 278–286, 1981.
    1. Boinski, S. Why don't Saimiri oerstedi and Cebus capuchinus form mixed species groups? International Journal of Primatology 10: 103–114.
    1. Brosset, A.; Erard, C. Les oiseaux des règions forestières du nord‐est du Gabon, Vol. 1, Ecologie et comportement des espèces. Societe National de Protection de la Nature, Paris, 1986.

LinkOut - more resources