New study shows us what 'lovebird' really means

Scientists at University of Oxford found that great tits value their relationships more than food.

Vasily Fedosenko/Reuters/file
Great Tit birds feed on nuts and seeds left by visitors in a bird feeder in a park in central Minsk, Belarus.

Scientists have found that even wild birds do crazy things for love. In studying mating pairs of great tits, or Parus major, researchers at the University of Oxford in the UK found that the small songbirds gave up access to food to stay close to their partners.

Though these birds already sacrifice some access to food to forage in flocks, which helps protect them from predators, scientists thought that tits who are mating would split up if that meant greater access to food. By restricting access to feeders to one bird in mating pairs, researchers found that the bird without access to a feeder still spent significant time there, alongside its feeding partner.

In a recent paper in the journal Current Biology, researchers from Oxford’s Department of Zoology say their study shows that love influences the great tit’s foraging behavior.

“The choice to stay close to their partner over accessing food demonstrates how an individual bird's decisions in the short term, which might appear sub-optimal, can actually be shaped around gaining the long-term benefits of maintaining their key relationships,” said study lead Josh Firth, an Oxford zoologist.

Like humans, birds stay in exclusive mating relationships for many seasons. Since great tits need their partner to reproduce and raise their chicks, the choice to skip meals to maintain their relationship seems to be a worthy tradeoff.

Researchers tested this by setting up bird feeders in the woods near the university, each releasing seed only to birds tagged with a radio frequency code that triggers the release. Half of the feeders opened only for even-numbered tags on the birds, and half opened only for odd-numbered tags. Some bird pairs had matching tags allowing them to eat from feeders in the same area, and other pairs had non-matching tags, which meant the doors would open only for one of them.

The study found that when pairs visited feeders they couldn’t both use, they spent more time there.

“Some birds would get away with mainly going to their preferred feeder, and having its partner following it there,” said Dr. Firth. “The flipside of this, of course, is that it means some birds pretty much spent all of their time at a feeder they were not allowed access to, just because its partner was going there,” he added. This was regardless of gender, he said.

But the committed birds didn’t necessarily go hungry, Oxford researchers found. Instead, the pairs seemed to cooperate, exploiting a feature of the feeder technology that allowed the seed release gate to stay open for a couple of seconds at a time. By acting quickly, both partners in a pair could eat some seed before the feeder closed.

Firth and his colleagues say that partners even seemed to be deliberately helping each other, reported Discover magazine.

“This may have widespread implications, particularly as changes in foraging associations carry over into other social contexts,” study authors wrote.

Understanding more about their social structures can provide insight on how diseases and information are spread through bird populations.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to New study shows us what 'lovebird' really means
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today