Olfactory camouflage and communication in birds
- PMID: 35128775
- DOI: 10.1111/brv.12837
Olfactory camouflage and communication in birds
Abstract
Smell is a sensory modality that is rarely considered in birds, but evidence is mounting that olfaction is an important aspect of avian behaviour and ecology. The uropygial gland produces an odoriferous secretion (preen oil) that can differ seasonally and between the sexes. These differences are hypothesized to function in olfactory camouflage, i.e. minimizing detection by nest predators (olfactory crypsis hypothesis), and/or intraspecific olfactory communication, particularly during breeding (sex semiochemical hypothesis). However, evidence for seasonal and sex differences in preen oil is mixed, with some studies finding differences and others not, and direct evidence for the putative function(s) of seasonal variation and sex differences in preen oil remains limited. We conducted a systematic review of the evidence for such changes in preen oil chemical composition, finding seasonal differences in 95% of species (57/60 species in 35 studies) and sex differences in 47% of species (28/59 species in 46 studies). We then conducted phylogenetic comparative analyses using data from 59 bird species to evaluate evidence for both the olfactory crypsis and sex semiochemical hypotheses. Seasonal differences were more likely in the incubating than non-incubating sex in ground-nesting species, but were equally likely regardless of incubation strategy in non-ground-nesting species. This result supports the olfactory crypsis hypothesis, if ground nesters are more vulnerable to olfactorily searching predators than non-ground nesters. Sex differences were more likely in species with uniparental than biparental incubation and during breeding than non-breeding, consistent with both the olfactory crypsis and sex semiochemical hypotheses. At present, the data do not allow us to disentangle these two hypotheses, but we provide recommendations that will enable researchers to do so.
Keywords: bird odour; chemical cues; infochemicals; mate recognition; olfaction; parental care; preen oil; scent; sexual selection; uropygial gland secretion.
© 2022 The Authors. Biological Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Cambridge Philosophical Society.
References
REFERENCES
-
- Abalain, J. H., Amet, Y., Daniel, J. Y. & Floch, H. H. (1984). Androgen regulation of secretions in the sebaceous-like uropygial gland of the male Japanese quail. Journal of Endocrinology 103, 147-153.
-
- Amat, J. A., Garrido, A., Portavia, F., Rendón-Martos, M., Pérez-Gálvez, A., Garrido-Fernández, J., Gómez, J., Béchet, A. & Rendón, M. A. (2018). Dynamic signalling using cosmetics may explain the reversed sexual dichromatism in the monogamous greater flamingo. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 72, 1-10.
-
- Amo, L., Avilés, J. M., Parejo, D., Peña, A., Rodríguez, J. & Tomás, G. (2012). Sex recognition by odour and variation in the uropygial gland secretion in starlings. Journal of Animal Ecology 81, 605-613.
-
- Angelstam, P. (1986). Predation on ground-nesting birds’ nests in relation to predator densities and habitat edge. Oikos 47, 365.
-
- Apandi, M. & Edwards, H. M. Jr. (1964). Studies on the composition of the secretions of the uropygial gland of some avian species. Poultry Science 43, 1445-1462.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
