Firstly, let's recap:
One: a male abandoned a nest of eggs. As E.S. pointed out, it wasn't hunger. BYC has some data on this: a male plonks hisself down, and stays 'til the chicks have hatched.
Two: there seems to be a fantastic (to me) 'elasticity' between the laying of an egg, and its being sat upon.
[If you ask me, I will try to track down the fabulous 'envirowarrior' Youtube video that provides the ONLY info. I could find on 'pre-nests.' There is also detail on our confusion about this subject at about Page Six of 'Mating-Season in Australia.']
Three: in the interests of merest objectivity, it's here we point out that, from Edward's point of view, it's all gettin' Just Too Weird. It would take a lifetime of study to try to differentiate which behaviours in a male emu are underpinned by biology, and which by culture. However, it's not nonsense to conjecture about this: Akmajian et al. have a great linguistics textbook that uses the nature of bird calls to show that Somethings Are Genetic, and Somethings Are Cultural. And, here we have a bird that is both lacking in whatever cultural education a male emu gets from its natural environment, and whose reality is at odds with his Biological Instructions.
So . . . hmmm . . . the first event -- Edward abandoning a clutch of eggs -- that's wrong; but surely what he is doing now -- sitting on every egg he can get his toosh on -- is Standard Emu Behaviour?
I have, for fear of offending, only ever once used the word 'derangement.' However, as you did ask: might it not be that what is going on here is exactly that the natural dynamic has been deranged by circumstances?
What is the overall situation? Just Edward and Edwina? That's important to know.
S.E.
