title: An experimental test of the information model for negotiation of biparental care.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Theoretical modelling of biparental care suggests that it can be a stable strategy if parents partially compensate for changes in behaviour by their partners. In empirical studies, however, parents occasionally match rather than compensate for the actions of their partners. The recently proposed "information model" adds to the earlier theory by factoring in information on brood value and/or need into parental decision-making. This leads to a variety of predicted parental responses following a change in partner work-rate depending on the information available to parents.
  
  
  RESULTS
  We experimentally test predictions of the information model using a population of long-tailed tits. We show that parental information on brood need varies systematically through the nestling period and use this variation to predict parental responses to an experimental increase in partner work-rate via playback of extra chick begging calls. When parental information is relatively high, partial compensation is predicted, whereas when parental information is low, a matching response is predicted.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  We find that although some responses are consistent with predictions, parents match a change in their partner's work-rate more often than expected and we discuss possible explanations for our findings.
authors: Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom. J.Meade@sheffield.ac.uk
authors: Jessica
authors: J
authors: Meade
authors: Ki-Baek
authors: KB
authors: Nam
authors: Jin-Won
authors: JW
authors: Lee
authors: Ben J
authors: BJ
authors: Hatchwell
references: Proc Biol Sci. 2001 May 7;268(1470):885-90
references: 11370960
references: Anim Behav. 1999 Aug;58(2):345-350
references: 10458886
references: Biol Lett. 2010 Jun 23;6(3):318-21
references: 20053663
references: J Evol Biol. 2009 Sep;22(9):1800-12
references: 19583699
references: J Theor Biol. 2000 Aug 21;205(4):605-23
references: 10931755
references: Trends Ecol Evol. 1997 Jan;12(1):11-5
references: 21237955
references: Nature. 1999 Sep 23;401(6751):368-71
references: 10517633
references: J Anim Ecol. 2010 Jan;79(1):44-52
references: 19674178