Why Do Birds False Alarm Flight?

Abstract

False alarm flighting in avian flocks is common, and has been explained as a maladaptive information cascade. If false alarm flighting is maladaptive per se, then its frequency can only be explained by it being net adaptive in relation to some other benefit or equilibrium. However, I argue that natural selection cannot distinguish between false and true alarm flights that have similar energetic costs, opportunity costs, and outcomes. False alarm flighting cannot be maladaptive if natural selection cannot perceive the difference between true and false alarm flighting. Rather, the question to answer is what false and true alarm flighting both have in common that is adaptive per se. The fire drill hypothesis of alarm flighting posits that false alarm flights are an adaptive investment in practicing escape. The fire drill hypothesis predicts that all individuals can benefit from practicing escape, particularly juveniles. Flighting practice could improve recognition of and response time to alarm flighting signals, could compensate for inter-individual and within-day weight differences, and could aid the development of adaptive escape tactics. Mixed-age flocks with many juveniles are expected to false alarm flight more than adult flocks. Flocks that inhabit complex terrain should gain less from escape practice and should false alarm flight less. Behavioural ecology framings can be fruitfully complemented by other research traditions of learning and behaviour that are more focused on maturation and motor learning processes.