Flexible cuckoo chick-rejection rules in the superb fairy-wren

98 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The wages of violence: mobbing by mockingbirds as a frontline defence against brood-parasitic cowbirds (2013, background): “They may also choose to abort laying attempts if they are mobbed, because hosts that interact with parasites near their nest are more likely to reject the parasitic egg or young later (Davies & Brooke 1988; Moksnes et al. 1993; Bartol et al. 2002; Langmore et al. 2009; Guigueno & Sealy 2011).”
Cuckoo adaptations: trickery and tuning (2011, background): “…defence, egg rejection and chick rejection in places and at times when parasitism is more likely (e.g. nest defence: Lindholm & Thomas, 2000; Røskaft et al., 2002; Welbergen & Davies, 2009; egg rejection: Brooke, Davies & Noble, 1998; Stokke et al., 2008; chick rejection: Langmore et al., 2009a).”
Advances in the Study of Coevolution Between Avian Brood Parasites and Their Hosts (2014, background): “Because the costs of brood parasitism accumulate throughout the nesting cycle (Davies 2011), this should slow the evolution of later-stage defenses relative to earlier-stage defenses, subject to evolutionary constraints (e.g., Rohwer & Spaw 1988, Langmore et al. 2009b, Grim et al. 2011).”