Biology subjects

Sieving, K. E.

Publications and source records attributed to Sieving, K. E..

2 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2026

FEED, FLEE, OR FACT-FIND: MODELING LATENT COGNITIVE-MECHANISTIC RESPONSES TO HETEROSPECIFIC ALARM CALLS FOR FORAGING CARDINALS

Heterospecific alarm calls allow animals to obtain information about predators from other species, but how receivers translate different forms of alarm information into defensive behavior remains poorly understood. In particular, signals may differ in whether they elicit rapid, relatively stereotyped responses or permit more graded evaluation of threat. We investigated this possibility by exposing foraging Northern cardinals (Cardinalis cardinalis) to playbacks of tufted titmouse (Baeolophus bicolor) calls associated with different predator contexts, including graded and immediate threats. To characterize responses, we developed a Bayesian latent-risk model that integrated three behaviors: feeding, vigilant looks, and departure, to estimate a shared dimension of perceived predation risk. Inferred risk increased from near-baseline levels under contact calls to intermediate levels under owl-associated call and the highest levels under ZZ calls. Increasing latent risk was associated with reduced expected seed intake and higher probability of complete feeding suppression. Vigilance showed a nonlinear relationship with inferred risk, increasing at intermediate levels before declining under the highest-risk treatment in favor of departure. This pattern is consistent with the possibility that receivers continue gathering information under intermediate threats but reduce vigilance when responding to more urgent danger. Although the experiment cannot fully establish whether these differences arise from canalized defensive responses or flexible cognitive evaluation, the results show how heterospecific alarm calls map onto distinct, coordinated behavioral responses.

animal behavior and cognition↗

bioRxiv2026

Green Leaves, Red Flags: Host Plant Associations as Indicators of Prey Defense for an Avian Predator

Defended prey are often thought to rely on conspicuous warning signals to distinguish themselves from undefended prey, facilitating predator learning and avoidance. Yet many chemically defended organisms are inconspicuous and difficult to distinguish from palatable prey, raising a fundamental question: how do predators avoid defended prey when prey themselves provide little or no reliable signals of defense? We tested whether host plants can function as indirect indicators of prey defense using Carolina wrens (Thryothorus ludovicianus), chemically defended Eumaeus atala larvae, undefended Galleria mellonella larvae, and two distinct plant species. Defended and undefended prey were experimentally made to appear visually identical, forcing predators to rely on host-plant associations as the only available source of information. Wrens rapidly altered both search behavior and attack decisions according to plant identity. Mechanistic attack models incorporating predator discrimination between defended and undefended prey were strongly favored when plants were present, with defended prey experiencing substantially lower attack risk than undefended prey. When plants were removed, support for discrimination weakened and attacks on both prey types increased. Spatial autocorrelation of host plants further shaped predator behavior, with strongly clustered plants hosting defended prey receiving disproportionately fewer visits. Together, these results suggest host plants can function as ecologically meaningful cues of prey defense, influencing both predator search patterns and attack decisions. More broadly, our findings suggest warning systems may extend beyond prey phenotype alone, and that ecological context (including host-plant identity and spatial structure) may contribute to the evolution and maintenance of aposematism.

ecology↗