Why Sociable Weavers Nest Together

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


Dillon Marsh's photographs of sociable weaver nests, taken in the Kalahari Desert of Southern Africa, beautifully illustrate traditional nature--the realm of wild animals--overlapping with human civilization. The apparent bales of hay draped over the tops and sides of telephone poles are home to hundreds of songbirds, which construct and maintain their monstrous nests communally.

While the merging of human and wild landscapes is powerful, perhaps the bigger oddity here is the nests themselves. Why would birds choose to live in a nest complex at all?

These nests are far more than apartment complexes for sociable weavers (Philetairus socius): they house multiple generations that work together to raise chicks. While most songbird species breed before they even turn a year old, sociable weavers rarely breed before the age of two. Instead, these younger birds help raise other nestlings--their siblings as well as unrelated chicks--by gathering food and maintaining the nest's fluffy interior chambers and external sticks and grass.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Why would these young birds decide to help out at home instead of raising families of their own? Part of the answer lies in their life history. The desert of Southern Africa is hot and dry, sure, but it's a very stable environment. The birds don't have to migrate or brave severe seasonal changes. The most dangerous time of their lives is when they are a chick in the nest: some 70% of baby sociable weavers are killed and eaten by snakes.

Once they grow up, they live for a long time (up to 10 years!) and mostly survive year-to-year. Long lives make for lots of time to breed, and once they start breeding, it's all they do. Most pairs of sociable weavers lay 2-6 eggs at least 4 times each year (and up to 9 times), and spend a lot of time raising these chicks.

However, while conditions are pretty constant in their habitat, sociable weavers still have trouble finding food. They mostly eat insects and seeds, which vary in abundance depending on the amount of rainfall in the desert--so not very much. A group of researchers from the University of Cape Town wanted to test if food availability affected the the 2-year delay in social weaver first-time breeding. When they scattered bird seed daily to boost food availability and reduce the risks of foraging, more first-time breeders bred early at just a year, and fewer birds stuck around to help out around the nest.

Evolutionarily speaking, this makes sense: a long-lived species would produce more offspring by waiting until they had preferential access to food for their chicks, instead of risking their own lives by trying to raise chicks when there's not enough food around. And, while they wait for their turn to access food, they may as well help out around the nest and ensure that it sticks around, for the present and future.

All photos courtesy of © Dillon Marsh. See the rest of the Assimilation series and his other work at his website.

Covas R., Doutrelant C. & du Plessis M.A. (2004). Experimental evidence of a link between breeding conditions and the decision to breed or to help in a colonial cooperative bird, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 271 (1541) 827-832. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2003.2652

Hannah Waters is a science writer fascinated by the natural world, the history of its study, and the way people think about nature. On top of science blogging, she runs the Smithsonian's Ocean Portal, a marine biology education website, and is science editor for Ladybits.

Hannah is a child of the internet, who coded HTML frames on her Backstreet Boys fanpage when she was in middle school. Aptly, she rose to professional science writing through blogging (originally on Wordpress) and tweeting profusely. She's written for The Scientist, Nature Medicine, Smithsonian.com, and others.

Before turning to full-time writing, Hannah wanted to be an oceanographer or a classicist, studying Biology and Latin at Carleton College in Northfield, Minnesota. She's done ecological research on marine food webs, shorebird conservation, tropical ecology and grassland ecosystems. She worked as a lab technician at the University of Pennsylvania studying molecular biology and the epigenetics of aging. And, for a summer, she manned a microphone and a drink shaker on a tour boat off the coast of Maine, pointing out wildlife and spouting facts over a loudspeaker while serving drinks.

Email her compliments, complaints and tips at culturingscience at gmail dot com.

More by Hannah Waters

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe