Using information acquired from other individuals (social information use) is ubiquitous in animals and not restricted to within-species context. Some of the textbook examples of interspecific information use in the wild has been provided using apparent novel niche experiment approach, with migratory flycatcher species (Ficedula spp.) cueing on apparent nest site preferences (geometric symbols) and clutch sizes of resident great tits (Parus major) and blue tits (Cyanistes caeruleus) to choose their own nest site. However, the interpretation of these results has recently been challenged. It has been argued that there is no evidence that flycatchers visit tit nests to collect information about clutch size or that flycatchers are capable of “counting” tit eggs. Instead, it has been proposed that the decision-making patterns of flycatchers found in earlier studies resulted from aggressive interactions, not information use, between tits and flycatchers (termed owner aggression hypothesis). Here, I contribute to the debate around both hypotheses and specifically explore the remaining points of disagreement, related to the timing of flycatchers prospecting and the cognitive abilities needed to assess tit clutch size. I argue how interannual variation in phenology can explain the apparent discrepancy between the observed and predicted timing of flycatchers prospecting. I also argue why assessing tit clutch size neither requires “counting” eggs nor any sophisticated cognitive capacities. Finally, I propose experimental designs to test the hypotheses on the underlying mechanisms explaining the observed patterns, which will allow taking further leaps in resolving the selective interspecific information use vs. owner aggression hypothesis dilemma.

中文翻译：

---

在解决选择性种间信息时，使用了主人翁侵略假说的困境与评注

使用从其他人那里获得的信息（使用社会信息）在动物中是普遍存在的，并且不仅限于种内环境。使用明显新颖的利基实验方法，提供了野外使用种间信息的一些教科书示例，其中有迁徙捕蝇器物种（Ficedula spp。）可以根据明显的巢穴位置偏好（几何符号）和栖息的大山雀（帕鲁斯（Parus））抓住大小主要）和蓝雀（Cyanistes caeruleus）选择自己的巢穴。但是，最近对这些结果的解释提出了挑战。有人争辩说，没有证据表明捕蝇器会访问山雀巢以收集有关离合器大小的信息，也没有证据表明捕蝇器能够“计数”山雀卵。取而代之的是，有人提出，早期研究中发现的捕蝇器的决策模式是山雀与捕蝇器之间的积极互动而非信息使用（被称为所有者侵略性假设）的结果。在这里，我为围绕这两种假设的辩论做出了贡献，并特别探讨了分歧的其余问题，这些问题与捕蝇器的勘探时间以及评估山雀离合器大小所需的认知能力有关。我认为物候学的年际变化如何解释捕蝇器的观测时间与预测时间之间的明显差异。我还争辩说，为什么评估山雀离合器的大小既不需要“数”鸡蛋又不需要任何复杂的认知能力。最后，我提出了实验设计，以在解释观察到的模式的潜在机制上测试假设，这将在解决选择性种间信息使用与所有者侵略假设难题之间取得更大飞跃。