Search

Intake rate maximization alone is not always sufficient in explaining prey size selection in predators. For example, bivalve-feeding oystercatchers regularly select smaller prey than expected if they aimed to maximize their intake rate. It has been proposed that to these birds large prey are ‘‘risky,’’ in the sense that birds may damage their bills when feeding on large bivalves. Large bivalves yield more energy, but according to this hypothesis this is achieved at the expense of energy yield in the long term when (1) the risk of bill damage increases with prey size and (2) foraging with a damaged bill is less effective. In accordance with this hypothesis, we show that captive oystercatchers feeding on large cockles experienced a high probability of bill tip damage, while bill damage was absent when cockles were small. Moreover, among free-living oystercatchers the prevalence of bill damage was correlated with mean cockle size near the capture site, and the data on captive birds fit in this pattern. Food intake of captive oystercatchers feeding exclusively on cockles was reduced by 23% after bill damage, and free-living birds with damaged bills had 14 g lower mass. Because lower body mass was associated with higher mortality probability, these results indicate long-term costs associated with feeding on large cockles. We conclude that the risk of bill damage can potentially explain why oystercatchers avoid large bivalves and that oystercatchers may maximize long-term intake rate by selecting prey sizes that are ‘‘suboptimal’’ from a short-term rate-maximizing point of view. Key words: prey choice, prey profitability, prey size selection, risky prey. [Behav Ecol]