DOI: 10.5061/dryad.37pvmcvt6
title: Data from: Response to food restriction, but not social information use, varies seasonally in captive cardueline finches

description: Temperate winters can impose severe conditions on songbirds that threaten
 survival, including shorter days and often lower temperature and food
 availability. One well-studied mechanism by which songbirds cope with such
 conditions is seasonal acclimatization of thermal metabolic traits, with
 strong evidence for both preparative and responsive changes in thermogenic
 capacity (i.e., the ability to generate heat) to low winter temperature.
 However, a bird's ability to cope with seasonal extremes or
 unpredictable events is likely dependent on a combination of behavioral
 and physiological traits that function to maintain allostatic balance. The
 ability to cope with reduced food availability may be an important
 component of organismal response to temperate winters in songbirds. Here
 we compare responses to experimentally reduced food availability at
 different times of year in captive red crossbills (Loxia curvirostra) and
 pine siskins (Spinus pinus) – two species that cope with variable food
 resources and live in cold places – to investigate seasonal changes in the
 organismal response to food availability. Further, red crossbills are
 known to use social information to improve response to reduced food
 availability, so we also examine whether use of social information in this
 context varies seasonally in this species. We find that pine siskins and
 red crossbills lose less body mass during time-restricted feedings in late
 winter compared to summer, and that red crossbills further benefit from
 social information gathered from observing other food-restricted red
 crossbills in both seasons. Observed changes in body mass were only
 partially explained by seasonal differences in food intake. Our results
 demonstrate seasonal acclimation to food stress and social information use
 across seasons in a controlled captive environment and highlight the
 importance of considering diverse physiological systems (e.g.,
 thermogenic, metabolic, digestive, etc) to understand organismal responses
 to environmental challenges.
description: These data were collected in an experimental, repeated measures
 design across multiple different experiments. Experiments were identical
 in their food restriction methodology but were performed with different
 individuals and in different years. We use this database to compare
 seasonal differences in food intake and change in body mass during food
 restriction in captive finches - the red crossbill and pine siskin. Food
 was restricted by limiting the access to food cups to two 45-minute
 feeding sessions per day. We also compare seasonal differences in food
 intake and change in body mass during food restriction between red
 crossbills with and without predictive social information from
 food-restricted neighbors. The data deposited here are raw scores of food
 intake and body mass for each individual in the experiment across three
 days of food restriction. Some birds were housed as dyads and some
 individually. For dyads we calcualted food intake as the change in the
 mass of the food cup divided by two. Only one food intake score per pair
 was included in analysis of food intake, although the a food intake value
 is provided in this database for every individual.  
description: # Data from: Response to food restriction, but not social information use,
 varies seasonally in captive cardueline finches
 [https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.37pvmcvt6](https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.37pvmcvt6) Raw data are provided for food intake and body mass during food restriction of red crossbills and pine siskins.  ## Description of the data and file structure | Bird ID: three digit identifier | | :----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | Species: species of focal bird | | Housed in Pair? Birds were either housed alone (No) or with another bird. Pairs are identified by a similar pair number.  | | Study Year: year in which data were collected | | Season: season in which data were collected | | Sex: M = male, F = female | | Social Information: birds were either food restricted without prior social warning from neighbors (None) or received three days of warning from food-restricted neighbors (Predictive) | | Food Intake 0: difference in mass of the food cup measured by electronic balance to nearest 0.01 grams on the day prior to food restriction. Food intake for birds housed in pairs is shown as an average for the cage.  | | Food Intake 1: difference in mass of the food cup measured by electronic balance to nearest 0.01 grams on the first day of food restriction. Food intake for birds housed in pairs is shown as an average for the cage.  | | Food Intake 3: difference in mass of the food cup measured by electronic balance to nearest 0.01 grams on the third day of food restriction. Food intake for birds housed in pairs is shown as an average for the cage.  | | Mass 0: body mass measured by electronic balance to nearest 0.01 grams on the day prior to food restriction | | Mass 1: body mass measured by electronic balance to nearest 0.01 grams after the first day of food restriction | | Mass 3: body mass measured by electronic balance to nearest 0.01 grams on the third day of food restriction | | NA: Note that data may be missing if food was spilled or birds were removed early from the food restriction due to body mass concerns.  | ## Sharing/Access information N/A ## Code/Software N/A