Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2025 Sep 14.
Published in final edited form as: Behav Ecol. 2025 May 25;36(4):araf058. doi: 10.1093/beheco/araf058

Table 2. The effect of environmental treatment, handfeeding, size and sibling competition on a chick’s begging posture.

MCMCglmm logistic regression, N = 29 nests, 54 adults, 199 chicks, 1121 feeding visits. The Bonferroni corrected cut-off for significance was 0.007, and significant terms are in bold.

Fixed effects Estimate 95% CI pMCMC
Mass (g) -0.02 -0.25 to 0.24 0.93
Weight rank (smallest or not smallest chick) 0.01 -0.60 to 0.58 0.98
Natal nest supplemented with food 0.07 -0.41 to 0.56 078
Foster nest supplemented with food 0.05 -0.43 to 0.53 0.85
Handfed to satiation before filming 0.91 0.61 to 1.28 <0.001***
Mean begging intensity of nestmates 0.31 0.23 to 0.38 <0.001***
Random effects
Natal Nest 0.26 0.08 to 0.49
Foster Nest 0.23 0.07 to 0.44
Parent ID 0.11 0.04 to 0.17
Chick ID 1.23 0.93 to 1.58