4.5 Article

Older male reed buntings are more successful at gaining extrapair fertilizations

期刊

ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR
卷 73, 期 -, 页码 15-27

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2006.01.031

关键词

cuckoldry; Ernberiza schoeniclus; extrapair paternity; fertilization success; male age; maternal half-siblings; reed bunting; song

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The importance of extrapair paternity (EPP) as an aspect of mixed reproductive strategies is currently the focus of many studies. Since females have at least some control over the occurrence of inseminations, they are expected to engage in extrapair copulations only if they benefit, for instance through gaining high-quality or compatible genes for their offspring, or insurance against infertility. To distinguish between these benefits, we studied characteristics related to intermale variation in fertilization success as well as differences in fitness between half-siblings in the reed bunting, Emberiza schoeniclus, a socially monogamous passerine with high levels of EPP (50% of young). We found that older males were more successful at siring offspring in other broods and a nonsignificant tendency for them to be less cuckolded in their own broods. The success of older males does not support the fertility insurance hypothesis: a male's sperm storage capacity did not predict his fertilization success, the occurrence of infertile eggs was unrelated to the occurrence of EPP in a nest and older males had more infertile eggs in nests with no EPP. Extrapair young had longer tarsi at fledging than their maternal half-siblings, but we found no other differences between maternal or paternal half-siblings in several presumed quality traits. Owing to the absence of long-term fitness data, we are unable to determine whether the difference in tarsus length is related to a difference in fitness benefits. At this time, we cannot exclude the possibility that females do gain genetic benefits through EPP. (c) 2006 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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