DOI: 10.5061/dryad.37pvmcvt1
title: Good vibrations: Remote-tactile foraging success of wading birds is positively affected by the water content of substrates they forage in

description: Some taxa of wading birds can locate buried prey by detecting vibratory
 cues in their foraging substrates while probe-foraging, using a sensory
 modality called “remote-touch”. As more saturated substrates transmit
 vibrations better, we predict that these birds can detect prey in wetter
 substrates more easily. We used sensory assays to test whether substrate
 water content affects the remote-touch foraging success rate of Hadeda
 Ibises, Bostrychia hagedash. The birds were more successful at locating
 prey using vibratory cues than when relying on random direct contact with
 the beak alone. Their remote-touch foraging success rate was positively
 affected by increasing water contents of the soil, but water content had
 no effect on their direct contact foraging success (indicating this is not
 an artefact of ease of probing). This may partially explain the link
 between the range expansion of this species in southern Africa and
 increased soil irrigation, as it is easier for the birds to detect prey in
 wetter substrates. Thus, it is likely that the distribution of other
 remote-touch foraging birds is affected by substrate water content, and as
 many of these species are endangered and rely on sensitive wetland
 habitats, it is vital to understand their sensory requirements for
 foraging.
description: # Good vibrations: Remote-tactile foraging success of wading birds is
 positively affected by the water content of substrates they forage in
 Access this dataset on Dryad
 [https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.37pvmcvt1](https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.37pvmcvt1) This is the data supporting our publication. Data were collected as part of a series of foraging experiments on captive Hadeda Ibises (*Bostrychia hagedash*), in order to a) confirm whether the species are able to use remote-touch probe-foraging (PART 1); and b) whether soil water content affects their ability to locate prey using remote-touch (PART 2). **Description of the data:** The data are contained in three .csv files. "part 1" includes data from part one of our experiments, used to assess the effects of different sensory cues (vibratory, auditory, and chemical) and the presence of white noise on the birds' foraging success, when soil water content was kept constant. "part 2" includes data from part two of our experiments, used to assess the effect of soil water content on the birds' ability to locate prey, and whether this differed when vibrational cues were absent/present The file "all merged" contains all data from both part one and two experiments, and is used to infer whether there were any differences between individual birds and the two field seasons, as well as whether air temperature had an effect on the birds' foraging success. All of the datasets (as .csv files) are required to run the R scripts (which were used to perform statistical analyses and generate the figures shown in the manuscript). Once the files have been downloaded, simply insert the relevant path where you have saved the files into the corresponding line in the R script (using R Studio - noted in the script). **Column headings/Abbreviations:** | **Auditory - were auditory cues available in the trial** | | :-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | Average time per worm - Total location time/number of worms captured during trial | | Chemical - were chemical/olfactory cues available during the trial | | Cues - sensory cues available to the birds | | DT - trial season ("E" = early season, Feb/Mar; "L" = late season, Nov/Dec) | | Individual - bird ID ("A" = "Blue Leg"; "B" = "Handsome"; "C" = "Scruffles"; "D" = "Solas") | | Month - month of trial | | Name - trial ID (made up of: date(day/month)-treatment\_bird ID\_tray number) | | Noisy - was white noise played during the trial | | Part - which experiment is the trial included in ("b" means the trial was included in both parts 1&2) | | Rate - average number of worms caught per minute (60 seconds/average time per worm) -- variable used as measure of birds foraging success | | Soil water - amount of water added to soil (0-750 mL) | | Temperature - hourly air temperature (degrees Celsius) | | Total location time - Time (in seconds) from start of trial until last worm was captured | | Treatment - experimental treatment used. Part 1: treatments 1-7, see Table 1 in the manuscript for treatment conditions. Part 2: 0-750 = amount of water added to soil; D/L = worms dead "D" or alive "L" | | Vibrations - were vibratory cues available in the trial | | W1-5 - time spent (in seconds) by the bird to locate each worm (max five worms available in each trial). Where cells are empty, birds did not capture that many worms during the trial | | Water - whether water was added to the soil or not | | Worm status - whether the worms were dead or alive |