Adult sex ratio (ASR, the proportion of males in the adult population) is a central concept in population and evolutionary biology, and is also emerging as a major factor influencing mate choice, pair bonding and parental cooperation in both human and non-human societies. However, estimating ASR is fraught with difficulties stemming from the effects of spatial and temporal variation in the numbers of males and females, and detection/capture probabilities that differ between the sexes. Here, we critically evaluate methods for estimating ASR in wild animal populations, reviewing how recent statistical advances can be applied to handle some of these challenges. We review methods that directly account for detection differences between the sexes using counts of unmarked individuals (observed, trapped or killed) and counts of marked individuals using mark–recapture models. We review a third class of methods that do not directly sample the number of males and females, but instead estimate the sex ratio indirectly using relationships that emerge from demographic measures, such as survival, age structure, reproduction and assumed dynamics. We recommend that detection-based methods be used for estimating ASR in most situations, and point out that studies are needed that compare different ASR estimation methods and control for sex differences in dispersal. This article is part of the themed issue ‘Adult sex ratios and reproductive decisions: a critical re-examination of sex differences in human and animal societies’.

Mutually enhancing organisms can become reciprocal determinants of their distribution, abundance, and demography and thus influence ecosystem structure and dynamics. In addition to the prevailing view of parrots (Psittaciformes) as plant antagonists, we assessed whether they can act as plant mutualists in the dry tropical forest of the Bolivian inter‐Andean valleys, an ecosystem particularly poor in vertebrate frugivores other than parrots (nine species). We hypothesised that if interactions between parrots and their food plants evolved as primarily or facultatively mutualistic, selection should have acted to maximize the strength of their interactions by increasing the amount and variety of resources and services involved in particular pairwise and community–wide interaction contexts. Food plants showed different growth habits across a wide phylogenetic spectrum, implying that parrots behave as super‐generalists exploiting resources differing in phenology, type, biomass, and rewards from a high diversity of plants (113 species from 38 families). Through their feeding activities, parrots provided multiple services acting as genetic linkers, seed facilitators for secondary dispersers, and plant protectors, and therefore can be considered key mutualists with a pervasive impact on plant assemblages. The number of complementary and redundant mutualistic functions provided by parrots to each plant species was positively related to the number of different kinds of food extracted from them. These mutually enhancing interactions were reflected in species‐level properties (e.g., biomass or dominance) of both partners, as a likely consequence of the temporal convergence of eco‐(co)evolutionary dynamics shaping the ongoing structure and organization of the ecosystem. A full assessment of the, thus far largely overlooked, parrot–plant mutualisms and other ecological linkages could change the current perception of the role of parrots in the structure, organization, and functioning of ecosystems.

Seed dispersal is one of the most studied plant–animal mutualisms. It has been proposed that the dispersal of many large-seeded plants from Neotropical forests was primarily conducted by extinct megafauna, and currently by livestock. Parrots can transport large fruits using their beaks, but have been overlooked as seed dispersers. We demonstrate that three macaws (Ara ararauna,A.glaucogularisandA.severus) are the main dispersers of the large-seeded motacú palmAttalea princeps, which is the biomass-dominant tree in the Bolivian Amazonian savannas. Macaws dispersed fruits at high rates (75–100% of fruits) to distant (up to 1200 m) perching trees, where they consumed the pulp and discarded entire seeds, contributing to forest regeneration and connectivity between distant forests islands. The spatial distribution of immature palms was positively associated to the proximity to macaws’ perching trees and negatively to the proximity to cattle paths. The disperser role of livestock, presumably a substitute for extinct megafauna, had little effect due to soil compaction, trampling and herbivory. Our results underscore the importance of macaws as legitimate, primary dispersers of large-seeded plants at long distances and, specifically, their key role in shaping the landscape structure and functioning of this Amazonian biome.

Parrots are largely considered plant antagonists as they usually destroy the seeds they feed on. However, there is evidence that parrots may also act as seed dispersers. We evaluated the dual role of parrots as predators and dispersers of the Critically Endangered Parana pine (Araucaria angustifolia). Eight of nine parrot species predated seeds from 48% of 526 Parana pines surveyed. Observations of the commonest parrot indicated that 22.5% of the picked seeds were dispersed by carrying them in their beaks. Another five parrot species dispersed seeds, at an estimated average distance of c. 250 m. Dispersal distances did not differ from those observed in jays, considered the main avian dispersers. Contrary to jays, parrots often dropped partially eaten seeds. Most of these seeds were handled by parrots, and the proportion of partially eaten seeds that germinated was higher than that of undamaged seeds. This may be explained by a predator satiation effect, suggesting that the large seeds of the Parana pine evolved to attract consumers for dispersal. This represents a thus far overlooked key plant-parrot mutualism, in which both components are threatened with extinction. The interaction is becoming locally extinct long before the global extinction of the species involved.

Estimating abundance and population size is essential for many ecological and conservation studies of parrots. Achieving these goals requires methods that yield reliable estimates, but parrot traits can make them difficult to detect, count, and capture. We review established and emergent sampling and analytical methods used to estimate parrot abundance and population size, focusing on their assumptions, requirements, and limitations. Roost surveys are cost-effective if all roost locations in a region are known and stable, which is uncommon. Capture–recapture methods incorporate detection probability, but capturing, marking and resighting parrots can be difficult. Distance sampling estimates detection probability and surveys multiple species simultaneously, but is sensitive to the spatial distribution of individuals and excludes birds in flight. Roadside transects can cover large areas and survey multiple species, but habitats near roads may differ from the surrounding areas, biasing abundance estimates. Occupancy surveys and hierarchical models usually require spatially and temporally replicated datasets. Both allow estimation of detection probability; the former dispenses with count data, while the latter is a versatile set of methods that can incorporate multiple processes influencing detection and abundance. Finally, passive acoustic surveys can sample multiple species simultaneously, but identification of vocalisations can be difficult and time-consuming.