Study of aggressive behavior of different species of birds in various places of the Wood-and-Steppe Zone of Ukraine with the methods of continuous logging and total surveillance revealed that aggression manifestation of birds in different territories are similar. Ratings of successive interactions among aggressive species in different areas are evaluated. According to the ratings, four types of birds position in the ranking were allocated and the species always holding to them in any area are established. The Blackbird is always dominating, whereas the Blue Tit and Treecreeper occupy a subordinate position. The Nuthatch, Greenfinch, Chaffinch, Marsh Tit, Great Tit, and Blackcap are characterized by active successful attack, but have low defense rating. These results can be used in analyzing the adaptation of certain bird species in communities and their success in competitive interactions in different areas.
If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.
Altmann, J. 1974. Observational study of behavior: sampling methods. Behaviour, 49, 227–267.
Arnott, G., Elwood, R.W. 2009. Assessment of fighting ability in animal contests. Animal Behaviour, 77, 991–1004.
Colleter, M., Brown, С. 2011. Personality traits predict hierarchy rank in male rainbowfish social groups. Animal Behaviour, 81 (6), 1231–1237.
Dingemanse, N. J., de Goede, P. 2004. The relation between dominance and exploratory behavior is context-dependent in wild great tits. Behavioral Ecology, 15 (6), 1023–1030.
Fesenko, G. V., Bokotey, A. A. 2002. Ukraine Fauna Birds: A field key. Kyiv, 1–416 [In Ukrainian].
Foltz, S. L., Ross, A. E., Laing, B. T. 2015. Get off my lawn: increased aggression in urban song sparrows is related to resource availability. Journal of Behavioral Ecology, 25, 871–884.
Forsman, J. T., Thomson, R. L., Seppänen, J. T. 2007. Mechanisms and fitness effects of interspecific information use between migrant and resident birds. Journal of Behavioral Ecology, 18 (5), 888–894.
Grabowska-Zhang, A. M., Wilkin, T. A., Sheldon, B. C. 2011. Effects of neighbor familiarity on reproductive success in the great tit (Parus major). Journal of Behavioral Ecology, 23 (2), 322–333.
Grava, A., Grava, T, Didier, R., Lait, L. A., Dosso, J., Koran, E, Burg, T. M., Otter, K. A. 2012. Interspecific dominance relationships and hybridization between black-capped and mountain chickadees. Behavioral Ecology, 23 (3), 566–572.
Grether, G. F., Losin, N., Anderson, C. N., Okamoto, K. 2009. The role of interspecific interference competition in character displacement and the evolution of competitor recognition. Biological Reviews, 84, 617–635.
Garamszegi, L. Z., Markó, G., Herczeg, G. 2013. A meta-analysis of correlated behaviors with implications for behavioral syndromes: relationships between particular behavioral traits. Behavioral Ecology, 24 (5), 1068–1080.
Hasegawa, M., Ligon, R. A., Giraudeau, M., Watanabe M., McGraw, K. J. 2014. Urban and colorful male house finches are less aggressive. Journal of Behavioral Ecology, 25 (3), 641–649.
Ivannitskiy, V. V. 1980. Interspesific relationship sympatric species heaters (Oenanthe, Turdidae, Passeriformes). The behavioral aspects of coexistence of similar species. Zoological journal, 59 (5), 739–749 [In Russian].
Ivanitskiy, V. V. 1982. Ethological aspects of relationship between close animal species. Zoological journal, 61 (10), 1461–1471 [in Russian]
Lehtonen, T. K., McCrary, J. K, Meyer, A. 2010. Territorial aggression can be sensitive to the status of heterospecific intruders. Behavioural Processes, 84, 598–601.
Markova, A. O. 2016. Interspecific and intraspecific aggression of Collared Flycatcher (Ficedula albicollis) and Spotted Flycatchers (Muscicapa striata). Odesa National University Herald. Biology, 2 (39), 97–108 [In Ukraine].
Mikami, O.K., Kawata, M. 2004. Does interspecific territoriality reflect the intensity of ecological interactions? A theoretical model for interspecific territoriality. Evolutionary Ecology Research, 6, 765–775.
Panov, E. N. 1983. Methodological problems in studying of communication and social behavior of animals. Problemyi etologii nazemnyih pozvonochnyih. The results of science and technology, Zoology of vertebrate, VINITI, 12, 5–70 [In Russian].
Panov, E. N., Ivanitskiy, V. V. 1975. The interspecific territorial relations in the mixed population of Finsch’s Wheatear Oenanthe finchi and pied wheatea O. pleschanka on the peninsula of Mangyshlak. Zoological journal, 54 (9), 1357–1370 [In Russian].
Panov, E. N., Ivanitskiy, V. V. 1979. Spatial relationship of four types of shrikes in the Southern Turkmenistan. Zoological journal, 58 (10), 1518–1535 [In Russian].
Peiman, K. S., Robinson, B. W. 2007. Heterospecific aggression and adaptive divergence in brook stickleback (Culaea inconstans). Evolution,61, 1327–1338.
Peiman, K. S, Robinson, B. W. 2010. Ecology and evolution of resource-related heterospecific aggression. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 85, 133–158.
Popov, S. V., Ilchenko, O. G. 2008. Methodical recommendations about ethological supervision over mammals in slavery. The Moscow zoo, Moscow, 1–165 [In Russian].
Reichert, M. S., Gerhardt, H. C. 2014. Behavioral strategies and signaling in interspecific aggressive interactions in gray tree frogs. Behavioral Ecology, 25 (3), 520–530.
Ryabitsev, V. K. 1977. Results of research of the interspecific territorial relations of birds on the Southern Yamal. Zoological journal, 56 (2), 232–242 [In Russian].
Sushma, H. S., Singh, M. 2006. Resource partitioning and interspecific interactions among sympatric rain forest arboreal mammals of the Western Ghats, India. Behavioral Ecology, 17 (3), 479–490.
Tanner, C. J, Adler, F. R. 2009. To fight or not to fight: context-dependent interspecific aggression in competing ants. Animal Behavaviour, 77, 297–305.
Umapathy, G., Kumar, A. 2000. The occurrence of arboreal mammals in the wet evergreen forests of the Anamalai hills in the Western Ghats, South India. Biological Conservation, 92, 311–319.