4.2 Article

Wing shape variation in the medium ground finch (Geospiza fortis): an ecomorphological approach

期刊

BIOLOGICAL JOURNAL OF THE LINNEAN SOCIETY
卷 98, 期 1, 页码 129-138

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL PUBLISHING, INC
DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8312.2009.01269.x

关键词

climate; ecomorphology; habitat use; inter-annual; inter-population; sexual differences

资金

  1. Fund for Scientific Research, Flanders, Belgium
  2. NSF [IBN-0347291]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Wing design in birds is subject to a suite of interacting selective pressures. As different performance traits are favoured in different ecological settings, a tight link is generally expected between variation in wing morphology and variation in ecological parameters. In the present study, we document aspects of variation in wing morphology in the medium ground finch (Geospiza fortis) on Isla Santa Cruz in the Galapagos. We compare variation in body size, simple morphometric traits (body mass, last primary length, wing length, wing chord, and wing area) and functional traits (wing loading, aspect ratio and wing pointedness) across years, among populations, and between sexes. Functional traits are found to covary across years with differences in climatic conditions, and to covary among populations with differences in habitat structure. In dry years and arid locations, wing aspect ratios are highest and wings are more pointed, consistent with a need for a low cost of transport. In wet years and cluttered habitats, wing loading is lowest and wings are more rounded, suggesting enhanced capabilities for manoeuvrability. Sexes differ in wing loading, with males having lower wing loadings than females. Superior manoeverability might be favoured in males for efficient territory maintenance. Lastly, in contrast to functional traits, we found little consistent inter-annual or inter-site variation in simple morphometric traits. (C) 2009 The Linnean Society of London, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2009, 98, 129-138.

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

4.2
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