4.3 Article

The effects of exposure and microbes on hatchability of eggs in open-cup and cavity nests

期刊

JOURNAL OF AVIAN BIOLOGY
卷 38, 期 6, 页码 709-716

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.0908-8857.2007.04052.x

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Many avian species initiate incubation before clutch completion, resulting in an asynchronous hatch of their eggs. Several studies suggest that early laid eggs in birds that exhibit synchronous hatching may be more vulnerable to the negative impacts of ambient temperatures and/or trans-shell infection by microbes. However, nearly all of these studies have exposed fertile eggs to environmental conditions in artificial cavity nests, and thus, the effects of exposure of eggs to environmental conditions in open-cup nests remains largely unknown. Therefore, we directly compared hatchability and rates of trans-shell infection in fertile domestic chicken eggs that were exposed for 1-5 days in either open-cup or cavity nests. Eggs in open-cup nests had significantly higher rates of trans-shell infection and lower hatchability than those in cavity nests. These differences may result from different environmental conditions in open-cup nests, as well as in rates of microbial colonization of eggs. Cavity nests maintained slightly higher temperatures than did open-cup nests in the same location; thus, eggs in cavity nests were exposed for a longer period of time to temperatures >= 27 degrees C, the temperature at which antibacterial enzymatic activity is initiated in the albumen. Moreover, microbial growth on eggs was much higher in open-cup nests even when eggs in these nests were cleaned daily with alcohol. It may be that the increased exposure to rain events in open-cup nests may facilitate microbial growth and egg infection. Thus, our data suggest that open-cup nesters may face constraints on reproduction different from those that cavity nesters face, and therefore may make choices regarding incubation that reflect these challenges.

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