4.3 Article

Blue tit Cyanistes caeruleus males increase their reproductive effort when subject to a flea experimental manipulation

期刊

JOURNAL OF AVIAN BIOLOGY
卷 52, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jav.02651

关键词

blue tit; chick growth; current reproductive success; Cyanistes caeruleus; flea manipulation experiment; male incubation feeding; reproductive effort

资金

  1. Swedish Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that in blue tit nests where hen fleas were increased, males increased their feeding efforts to females, and feeding frequency was positively related to clutch size. Experimental evidence showed that males increase their reproductive effort to compensate for the costs of high ecto-parasite density and many nestlings in the nest.
Parasites exert a strong selection pressure on their hosts as manifested in behavioural antiparasite traits to reduce negative impacts on fitness. The numerous nest-dwelling ecto-parasites residing in avian nests make altricial birds excellent model-systems for investigating the relationship between parasites and their hosts. Here, we experimentally increased natural levels of hen fleas Ceratophyllus gallinae in blue tit Cyanistes caeruleus nests during incubation, and tested their effects on parental incubation behaviours and reproductive performance. Our experimental addition of fleas resulted in an increase in feeding effort of males to incubating females. Frequency of male feedings was also positively related to clutch size. These results suggest that males increase their reproductive effort in flea manipulated and large broods. This will, at least partly, compensate female costs in nests with high ecto-parasite density and many nestlings. Furthermore, nestling mass at day six in experimental nests decreased with brood size, which was not the case in nests with a natural level of fleas. In line with male incubation feeding, parents may try to compensate for the costs inflicted by the fleas but can only partly compensate when brood size is large.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据