Skip to content
NatureHQ

Study

Social Learning of Migratory Performance

Mueller, Thomas; O'Hara, Robert B.; Converse, Sarah J.; Urbanek, Richard P.; Fagan, William F.

Science, 2013

Peer-reviewedfield observationwild

Analysed the migration tracks of captive-bred whooping cranes released into a reintroduced population, testing how far birds strayed from the straight route against their age and the age composition of the group they travelled with.

Studied in
Grus americana
Sample size
eight years of tracked reintroduced whooping cranes

Deviation from the direct route fell as birds aged, and a group containing older birds performed better than one of the same size without them; the presence of a single older individual accounted for far more improvement than group size did.

What it means

The authors' reading, and ours. Where they differ, that difference is the point.

How the authors put it

Migratory performance in this species improves through social learning from experienced individuals rather than through individual maturation alone.

How NatureHQ reads it

The strongest evidence NatureHQ holds that a route can be a piece of culture. The design is unusual and worth stating: because the population was reintroduced, every bird’s age and travelling companions were known, which is exactly the record a wild population never provides.

  • A reintroduced population that learned its first route from human-led aircraft, which is not how a wild population acquires one.
  • One long-lived, socially migrating species; it says nothing about the many songbirds that migrate alone in their first year.
  • Following young cranes for eight years to see who taught them

    When a migratory route improves with age, is the bird getting better on its own or learning from older birds?

What this study is used for on NatureHQ

One study can inform several subjects. Here is everywhere this one is cited.

Published by: American Association for the Advancement of SciencePublished in Science or Science Advances (AAAS).

doi.org/10.1126/science.1237139

Checked against Crossref on 2026-09-28, and they agree on the title, the authors and the year.

NatureHQ summarises research in its own words and does not reproduce published text. Reviewed 2026-09-03.