Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 816

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Risks and Rewards of Nest Defence by Parent Birds

Montgomerie, Robert D., Weatherhead, Patrick J.·1988·The Quarterly Review of Biology

Abstract

Nest and offspring defence by birds can be treated as an optimization problem wherein fitness benefits are determined by the survival of the current brood and fitness costs depend upon the probability that the parent will survive to breed again. At the optimal intensity of defence, net fitness benefits are maximized. Unlike many other aspects of animal behavior, the reproductive consequences of nest defence can often be measured directly. Within this optimality framework, we review the current adaptive hypotheses to explain both interspecific and intraspecific variation in nest defence behavior, and we present some new ideas of our own. Most research to date has focused on seasonal patterns of nest defence to test the prediction that the intensity of nest defence should increase through the nesting cycle either because renesting potential declines or because the probability of offspring survival increases rapidly relative to that of the parents. Studies testing the renesting potential hypothesis have both supported and rejected it, but few studies to date have been controlled well enough to allow us to distinguish between the two hypotheses. The intensity of nest defence is also predicted to increase with parental experience and confidence of parenthood; offspring number, quality and vulnerability; and nest accessibility and conspicuousness. The response of parents is also expected to vary with the relative armament and mobility of parent and predator and the relative roles of the parents in caring for their offspring. Although there is some evidence supporting many of these predictions, most have not been explicitly tested while holding other factors constant. The tendency for researchers to ignore variables that might influence the intensity of nest defence makes the conclusions of most studies that find support for any single adaptive hypothesis relatively unconvincing. Like Optimal Foraging Theory, however, a comprehensive functional theory of nest defence based on life-history theory can help us to elucidate many of the patterns observed in this important aspect of the parental care behavior of a wide variety of animals.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/415838

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 49 references

Cited by

See all 816

Metadata

Authors
Montgomerie, R. D., & Weatherhead, P. J.
Venue
The Quarterly Review of Biology
Published
1988-06
Volume
63
Issue
2
Pages
167-187
ISSN
  • 0033-5770 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-7718
OpenAlex
W2000539594
Cited by
816
References
49
FWCI
20.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Risks and Rewards of Nest Defence by Parent Birds. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/415838
The paper
Montgomerie, R. D., & Weatherhead, P. J. (1988). Risks and Rewards of Nest Defence by Parent Birds. The Quarterly Review of Biology. https://doi.org/10.1086/415838

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.