4.2 Article

Senescence in relation to latitude and migration in birds

Journal

JOURNAL OF EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY
Volume 20, Issue 2, Pages 750-757

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2006.01236.x

Keywords

actuarial senescence; anti-oxidants; bird banding; evolutionary theories of senescence; longevity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Senescence is the age-related deterioration of the phenotype, explained by accumulation of mutations, antagonistic pleiotropy, free radicals or other mechanisms. I investigated patterns of actuarial senescence in a sample of 169 species of birds in relation to latitude and migration, by analysing longevity records adjusted for sampling effort, survival rate and body mass. Senescence might decrease at low latitudes because of elevated adult survival rates and generally slow life histories. Alternatively, the rate of senescence might increase at low latitudes because of the greater impact of biological interactions such as parasitism, predation and competition on fitness through differential effects of age-specific mortality (e.g. because immunologically naive young individuals and immuno-senescent old individuals might die more frequently than individuals belonging to intermediate age classes). Bird migration entails extensive exercise twice annually, with migrants spending more time in benign environments with little abiotic mortality than residents, migrants having higher adult survival rate and lower annual fecundity than residents, and migrants suffering more from the consequences of oxidative stress than residents. The rate of senescence increased with latitude, as expected because of slow life histories at low latitudes. Independently, rate of senescence decreased with increasing migration distance. These findings were robust to control for potentially confounding effects of body mass, age of first reproduction and phenotypic similarity among species because of common descent.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available