Ecology and Evolution of Cooperative Breeding in Birds: Delayed dispersal
By Jan Ekman, Janis Dickinson, B. Hatchwell, Michael Griesser. 2004
97 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Ecology, Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a084150b0446a1cf7b2c749adec83e44c3903699
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Ecology
- Michael Griesser
- A. Cockburn
- Jan Ekman
- Andrew F. Russell
- Simon C. Griffith
- Philippa R. Gullett
- J. Komdeur
- E. Sorato
In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
- Michael Griesser
- A. Cockburn
- Jan Ekman
- Andrew F. Russell
- Simon C. Griffith
- J. Komdeur
- B. Hatchwell
- Janis Dickinson
Citations in the corpus
- Effects of predation risk on foraging behaviour and group size: adaptations in a social cooperative species (2012, background): “In cooperative birds, inwhichmost of the research on the factors selecting for group living has been conducted (Ekman et al. 2004; Russell 2004), group size is generally predicted to increase with the relative costs of dispersing to breed independently owing to a lack of mates or territories of…”
- Prevalence of different modes of parental care in birds (2006, background): “In addition, I also identified cases in which birds live in groups founded by natal philopatry (group), but in which cooperative breeding does not occur, as these have provoked considerable recent interest (Ekman et al. 2004).”
- Nepotistic mobbing behaviour in the Siberian jay, Perisoreus infaustus (2005, background): “Such a preferential treatment of relatives only would be nepotistic and could encourage offspring to postpone their natal dispersal and thereby be a key to the formation of kin groups (Brown & Brown 1984; Brown 1987; Ekman et al. 2001a, 2004; Griesser 2003a, b).”
- Variation in Individual Investment Strategies among Social Animals (2006, background): “…independent breeding options (‘ecological constraints’, Emlen 1982; Koenig et al. 1992) or by cooperative or mutualistic benefits of remaining at home (‘benefits of philopatry’, Stacey & Ligon 1987, 1991; Ekman et al. 2004; ‘benefits of group augmentation’, Kokko et al. 2001) instead of dispersing.”