Möchten Sie über diese Zeitschrift informiert bleiben? Klicken Sie bitte auf die Buttons, um unsere Alerts zu abonnieren.
Möchten Sie über diese Zeitschrift informiert bleiben? Klicken Sie bitte auf die Buttons, um unsere Alerts zu abonnieren.
Mate preference does not influence reproductive motivation and parental cooperation in female zebra finches
in BehaviourSearch for other papers by Ãkos Pogány in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Zita Szurovecz in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by ErnÅ Vincze in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Zoltán Barta in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Tamás Székely in
Current site
Google Scholar
In socially monogamous species, low availability of sexually active unpaired individuals in the local population may constrain mate choice, resulting in mating with sub-optimal partners. Here we experimentally investigate whether female reproductive behaviour is different when paired with a preferred or a non-preferred male in the zebra finch (Taeniopygia guttata). First, we assessed female mating preferences using a four-way choice apparatus, then females were caged together with either their preferred or least-preferred male. Female reproductive motivation, assessed by the propensity of laying eggs within two weeks from pairing and clutch mass, did not differ between the two experimental groups. Females responded to mate removal by either increasing their care, so as to compensate for the lost care of their mate, or by significantly reducing incubation. This bimodal response was not explained by mate preference, nevertheless, we found that females with lower baseline (i.e., pre-manipulation) incubation effort were more likely to cease incubation during mate removal. Taken together, we found no evidence that female reproductive behaviour varies along with mate preference.
Kauf
Sofortzugang erwerben (PDF-Download und unbegrenzter Online-Zugang):
Institutszugang
Melden Sie sich mit Open Athens, Shibboleth oder Ihren institutionellen Anmeldedaten an.
Persönliche Anmeldung
Melden Sie sich mit Ihrem brill.com-Konto an
-
Barta Z., Houston A.I., McNamara J.M., Székely T. (2002). Sexual conflict about parental care: the role of reserves. â Am. Nat. 159: 687-705.
-
Bennett A.T.D., Cuthill I.C., Partridge J.C., Maier E.J. (1996). Ultraviolet vision and mate choice in zebra finches. â Nature 380: 433-435.
-
Bize P., Diaz C., Lindstrom J. (2012). Experimental evidence that adult antipredator behaviour is heritable and not influenced by behavioural copying in a wild bird. â Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 279: 1380-1388.
-
Bolund E., Schielzeth H., Forstmeier W. (2009). Compensatory investment in zebra finches: females lay larger eggs when paired to sexually unattractive males. â Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 276: 707-715.
-
Burley N.T. (1986). Sexual selection for aesthetic traits in species with biparental care. â Am. Nat. 127: 415-445.
-
Burley N.T. (1988). The differential-allocation hypothesis â an experimental test. â Am. Nat. 132: 611-628.
-
Caspers B.A., Krause E.T. (2011). Odour-based natal nest recognition in the zebra finch (Taeniopygia guttata), a colony-breeding songbird. â Biol. Lett. 7: 184-186.
-
Clutton-Brock T.H. (1991). The evolution of parental care. â Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
-
Dor R., Lotem A. (2010). Parental effort and response to nestling begging in the house sparrow: repeatability, heritability and parent-offspring co-evolution. â J. Evol. Biol. 23: 1605-1612.
-
Fisher M.O., Nager R.G., Monaghan P. (2006). Compensatory growth impairs adult cognitive performance. â PLoS Biol. 4: 1462-1466.
-
Forstmeier W., Birkhead T.R. (2004). Repeatability of mate choice in the zebra finch: consistency within and between females. â Anim. Behav. 68: 1017-1028.
-
Gorman H.E., Arnold K.E., Nager R.G. (2005). Incubation effort in relation to male attractiveness in zebra finches Taeniopygia guttata. â J. Avian Biol. 36: 413-420.
-
Gowaty P.A. (2003). Power asymmetries between the sexes, mate preferences, and components of fitness. â In: Evolution, gender and rape ( Travis C.B., ed.). MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, p. 61-86.
-
Gowaty P.A. (2008). Reproductive compensation. â J. Evol. Biol. 21: 1189-1200.
-
Gowaty P.A., Anderson W.W., Bluhm C.K., Drickamer L.C., Kim Y.K., Moore A.J. (2007). The hypothesis of reproductive compensation and its assumptions about mate preferences and offspring viability. â Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 104: 15023-15027.
-
Griffith S.C., Holleley C.E., Mariette M.M., Pryke S.R., Svedin N. (2010). Low level of extrapair parentage in wild zebra finches. â Anim. Behav. 79: 261-264.
-
Griffith S.C., Pryke S.R., Buttemer W.A. (2011). Constrained mate choice in social monogamy and the stress of having an unattractive partner. â Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 278: 2798-2805.
-
Griggio M., Matessi G., Pilastro A. (2005). Should I stay or should I go? Female brood desertion and male counterstrategy in rock sparrows. â Behav. Ecol. 16: 435-441.
-
Harrison F., Barta Z., Cuthill I., Székely T. (2009). How is sexual conflict over parental care resolved? A meta-analysis. â J. Evol. Biol. 22: 1800-1812.
-
Hoppitt W., Laland K.N. (2013). Social learning: an introduction to mechanisms, methods and models. â Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
-
Kosztolányi A., Cuthill I.C., Székely T. (2009). Negotiation between parents over care: reversible compensation during incubation. â Behav. Ecol. 20: 446-452.
-
Krause E.T., Naguib M. (2011). Compensatory growth affects exploratory behaviour in zebra finches, Taeniopygia guttata. â Anim. Behav. 81: 1295-1300.
-
Krause E.T., Krüger O., Kohlmeier P., Caspers B.A. (2012). Olfactory kin recognition in a songbird. â Biol. Lett. 8: 327-329.
-
Lack D.L. (1968). Ecological adaptations for breeding in birds. â Methuen, London.
-
Lendvai Ã.Z., Barta Z., Chastel O. (2009). Conflict over parental care in house sparrows: do females use a negotiation rule? â Behav. Ecol. 20: 651-656.
-
Lessells C.M. (2006). The evolutionary outcome of sexual conflict. â Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 361: 301-317.
-
Liker A. (1995). Monogamy in precocial birds: a review. â Ornis Hung. 5: 1-14.
-
MacColl A.D.C., Hatchwell B.J. (2003). Heritability of parental effort in a passerine bird. â Evolution 57: 2191-2195.
-
Maynard Smith J. (1977). Parental investment: a prospective analysis. â Anim. Behav. 25: 1-9.
-
McNamara J.M., Weissing F.J. (2010). Evolutionary game theory. â In: Social behaviour: genes, ecology and evolution ( Székely T., Moore A.J., Komdeur J., eds). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
-
McNamara J.M., Houston A.I., Barta Z., Osorno J.L. (2003). Should young ever be better off with one parent than with two? â Behav. Ecol. 14: 301-310.
-
Metcalfe N.B., Monaghan P. (2001). Compensation for a bad start: grow now, pay later? â Trends Ecol. Evol. 16: 254-260.
-
Pariser E.C., Mariette M.M., Griffith S.C. (2010). Artificial ornaments manipulate intrinsic male quality in wild-caught zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata). â Behav. Ecol. 21: 264-269.
-
Pogány Ã., Heszberger J., Szurovecz Z., Vincze E., Székely T. (2014). An infrared motion detector system for lossless real-time monitoring of animal preference tests. â Acta Biol. Hung. 65: in press.
-
R Core Team (2013). R: a language and environment for statistical computing. â R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.
-
Ratikainen I.I., Kokko H. (2010). Differential allocation and compensation: who deserves the silver spoon? â Behav. Ecol. 21: 195-200.
-
Rehling A., Spiller I., Krause E.T., Nager R.G., Monaghan P., Trillmich F. (2012). Flexibility in the duration of parental care: zebra finch parents respond to offspring needs. â Anim. Behav. 83: 35-39.
-
Royle N.J., Hartley I.R., Parker G.A. (2002). Sexual conflict reduces offspring fitness in zebra finches. â Nature 416: 733-736.
-
Sheldon B.C. (2000). Differential allocation: tests, mechanisms and implications. â Trends Ecol. Evol. 15: 397-402.
-
Swaddle J.P., Cuthill I.C. (1994). Preference for symmetrical males by female zebra finches. â Nature 367: 165-166.
-
van Dijk R.E., Pogány Ã., Komdeur J., Lloyd P., Székely T. (2010). Sexual conflict predicts morphology and behavior in two species of penduline tits. â BMC Evol. Biol. 10: 107.
-
Waas J.R., Wordsworth A.F. (1999). Female zebra finches prefer symmetrically banded males, but only during interactive mate choice tests. â Anim. Behav. 57: 1113-1119.
-
Whittingham L.A., Dunn P.O., Robertson R.J. (1994). Female response to reduced male parental care in birds â an experiment in tree swallows. â Ethology 96: 260-269.
-
Wright J., Cuthill I. (1989). Manipulation of sex-differences in parental care. â Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 25: 171-181.
-
Zann R.A. (1996). Zebra finch: a synthesis of field and laboratory studies. â Oxford University Press, Oxford.
| Insgesamt | Letzte 365 Tage | In den letzten 30 Tagen | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aufrufe von Kurzbeschreibungen | 631 | 134 | 14 |
| Gesamttextansichten | 149 | 2 | 0 |
| PDF-Downloads | 38 | 4 | 0 |
Mate preference does not influence reproductive motivation and parental cooperation in female zebra finches
in BehaviourSearch for other papers by Ãkos Pogány in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Zita Szurovecz in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by ErnÅ Vincze in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Zoltán Barta in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Tamás Székely in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
In socially monogamous species, low availability of sexually active unpaired individuals in the local population may constrain mate choice, resulting in mating with sub-optimal partners. Here we experimentally investigate whether female reproductive behaviour is different when paired with a preferred or a non-preferred male in the zebra finch (Taeniopygia guttata). First, we assessed female mating preferences using a four-way choice apparatus, then females were caged together with either their preferred or least-preferred male. Female reproductive motivation, assessed by the propensity of laying eggs within two weeks from pairing and clutch mass, did not differ between the two experimental groups. Females responded to mate removal by either increasing their care, so as to compensate for the lost care of their mate, or by significantly reducing incubation. This bimodal response was not explained by mate preference, nevertheless, we found that females with lower baseline (i.e., pre-manipulation) incubation effort were more likely to cease incubation during mate removal. Taken together, we found no evidence that female reproductive behaviour varies along with mate preference.
| Insgesamt | Letzte 365 Tage | In den letzten 30 Tagen | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aufrufe von Kurzbeschreibungen | 631 | 134 | 14 |
| Gesamttextansichten | 149 | 2 | 0 |
| PDF-Downloads | 38 | 4 | 0 |
