Aerodynamic costs of long tails in male barn swallows Hirundo rustica and the evolution of sexual size dimorphism

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 10, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 128-135

  Barbosa, Andrés ^a,b   Møller, Anders Pape ^a  

^a SORBONNE UNIVERSITÉ   (France)

^b MUSEO NACIONAL DE CIENCIAS NATURALES   (Spain)

Author keywords

Clinal variation; Flight costs; Sexual selection; Tail shape

Indexed keywords

BIRD; MORPHOLOGY; SEXUAL SELECTION; SIZE DISTRIBUTION; TAIL FEATHER;

HIRUNDO RUSTICA;

EID: 0032910089     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/10.2.128     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Andersson M, 1982. Female choice selects for extreme tail length in a widowbird. Nature 299:818-820.
2. Andersson M, 1986. Evolution of condition-dependent sex ornaments and mating preferences: Sexual selection based on viability differences. Evolution 40:804-816.
3. Andersson S, 1992. Female preference for long tails in lekking Jackson's widowbirds: Experimental evidence. Anim Behav 43:379-388.
4. Andersson S, Andersson M, 1994. Tail ornamentation, size dimorphism and wing length in the genus Euplectes (Ploceinae). Auk 111: 80-86.
5. Balmford A, Jones IL, Thomas ALR, 1994. How to compensate for costly sexually selected tails: the origin of sexually dimorphic wings in long-tailed birds. Evolution 48:1062-1070.
6. Balmford A, Thomas ALR, Jones IL, 1993. Aerodynamics and the evolution of long tails in birds. Nature 36:628-630.
7. Barbosa A, Møller AP, in press. Sexual selection and tail streamers in the barn swallow: appropriate test of the function of size-dimorphic long tails. Behav Ecol.
8. Beament JWL, Treherne JE, 1968. Insects and physiology. New York: Elsevier.
9. Bryant DM, Turner K, 1982. Central place foraging by swallows: the question of load size. Anim Behav 30:845-856.
10. Cramp S, 1988. Handbook of the birds of Europe, the Middle East and North Africa, vol. 5. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11. Cuervo JJ, de Lope F, Møller AP, 1996. The function of long tails in female barn swallows (Hirundo rustica): an experimental study. Behav Ecol 7:132-136.
12. Darwin C, 1871. The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. London: Murray.
13. de Lope F, Møller AP, 1993. Female reproductive effort depends on the degree of ornamentation of their mates. Evolution 47:1152-1160.
14. Endler JA, 1977. Geographic variation, speciation, and clines. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
15. Evans M, Hatchwell BJ, 1992. An experimental study of male adornment in the scarlet-tufted malachite sunbird: II The role of the elongated tail in mate choice and experimental evidence for a handicap. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 29:421-427.
16. Evans MR, Thomas ALR, 1992. The aerodynamic and mechanical consequences of elongated tails in the scarlet-tufted malachite sunbird: measuring the cost of a handicap. Anim Behav 43:337-347.
17. Evans MR, Thomas ALR, 1997. Testing the functional significance of tail streamers. Proc R Soc Lond B 264:211-217.
18. Felsenstein J, 1985. Phylogenies and the comparative method. Am Nat 125:1-15.
19. Fisher RA, 1930. The genetical theory of natural selection. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
20. Garland T, Harvey PH, Ives AR, 1992. Procedures for the analysis of comparative data using phylogenetically independent contrasts. Syst Biol 41:18-32.
21. Gill FB, Wolf LL, 1975. Economics of feeding territoriality in the golden-winged sunbird. Ecology 56:333-345.
22. Glutz von Blotzheim UN, Bauer KM, 1985. Handbuch der Vögel Mitteleuropas, vol 10/1. Wiesbaden: AULA-Verlag.
23. Grafen A, 1990. Sexual selection unhandicapped by the Fisher process. J Theor Biol 144:475-516.
24. Harrison TH, 1931. On the normal flight speeds of birds. Br Birds 25:86-96.
25. Heywood JS, 1989. Sexual selection by the handicap principle. Evolution 43:1387-1397.
26. Iwasa Y, Pomiankowski A, Nee S, 1991. The evolution of costly mate preferences. II. The "handicap" principle. Evolution 45:1431-1442.
27. James FC, McCulloch CE, 1990. Multivariate analysis in ecology and systematics: panacea or Pandora's box? Annu Rev Ecol Syst 21:129-166.
28. Kirkpatrick M, 1982. Sexual selection and the evolution of female choice. Evolution 36:1-12.
29. Kodric-Browii A, Brown JH, 1984. Truth in advertising: the kinds of traits favored by sexual selection. Am Nat 124:303-323.
30. König C, Schmid-Hempel P, 1995. Foraging activity and immunocompetence in workers of the bumble bee Bombus terrestris L. Proc R Soc Lond B 260:225-227.
31. Lande R, 1981. Models of speciation by sexual selection on polygenic characters. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 78:3721-3725.
32. Loske KH, 1993. Untersuchungen zu Überlebensstrategien der Rauchschwalbe (Hirundo rustica) in Brutgebiet (Ph D thesis). Göttingen: Cuvillier Verlag.
33. Meinertzhagen R, 1955. The speed and altitude of bird flight (with notes on other animals). Ibis 97:81-117.
34. Møller AP, 1988. Female choice selects for male sexual tail ornaments in the monogamous swallow. Nature 332:640-642.
35. Møller AP, 1989. Viability costs of male tail ornaments in a swallow. Nature 339:132-135.
36. Møller AP, 1990. Male tail length and female mate choice in the monogamous swallow Hirundo rustica. Anim Behav 39:458-465.
37. Møller AP, 1991. Sexual selection in the monogamous barn swallow (Hirundo rustica). I. Determinants of tail ornament size. Evolution 45:1823-1836.
38. Møller AP, 1992a. Female swallow preference for symmetrical male sexual ornaments? Nature 357:238-240.
39. Møller AP, 1992b. Sexual selection in the monogamous swallow (Hirundo rustica). II. Mechanisms of intersexual selection. J Evol Biol 5:603-624.
40. Møller AP, 1993. Sexual selection in the barn swallow (Hirundo rustica). III. Female tail ornaments. Evolution 47:417-431.
41. Møller AP, 1994. Sexual selection and the barn swallow. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
42. Møller AP, 1995. Sexual selection in the barn swallow (Hirundo rustica). V Geographic variation in ornament size. J Evol Biol 8:3-19.
43. Møller AP, 1996. The cost of secondary sexual characters and the evolution of cost-reducing traits. Ibis 138:112-119.
44. Møller AP, Barbosa A, Cuervo JJ, de Lope F, Merino S, Saino N, 1998. Sexual selection and tail streamers in the barn swallow. Proc R Soc Lond B 265:409-414.
45. Møller AP, de Lope F, 1994. Differential costs of a secondary sexual character: an experimental test of the handicap principle. Evolution 48:1676-1683.
46. Møller AP, de Lope F, López Caballero JM, 1995a. Foraging costs of a tail ornament experimental evidence from two populations of barn swallows Hirundo rustica with different degrees of sexual size dimorphism. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 37:289-295.
47. Ḿller AP, de Lope F, Saino N, 1995b. Sexual selection in the barn swallow Hirundo rustica. VI. Aerodynamic adaptations. J Evol Biol 8:671-687.
48. Norberg RA, 1994. Swallow tail streamer is a mechanical device for self-deflection of tail leading edge, enhancing aerodynamic efficiency and flight manoeuvrability. Proc R Soc Lond B 257:227-233.
49. Norberg UM, 1995. How a long tail and changes in mass and wing shape affect the cost for flight in animals. Funct Ecol 9:48-54.
50. Pennycuick CJ, 1989. Bird flight performance: A practical calculation manual. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
51. Pomiankowski A, Iwasa, Nee S, 1991. The evolution of costly mate preferences. I. Fisher and biased mutation. Evolution 45:1422-1430.
52. Prandtl L, Tietjens OG, 1934. Applied hydro- and aerodynamics. New York: Dover Publications.
53. Price T, Schluter D, Heckman NE, 1993. Sexual selection when the female directly benefits. Biol J Linn Soc 48:187-211.
54. Saino N, Cuervo JJ, Krivacek M, de Lope F, Møller AP, 1997. Experimental manipulation of tail ornament size affects haematocrit of male barn swallows, Hirundo rustica. Oecologia 110:186-190.
55. Saino N, Møller AP, 1996. Sexual ornamentation and immunocompetence in the barn swallow. Behav Ecol 7:227-232.
56. Slatkin M, 1985. Gene flow in natural populations. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 16:393-340.
57. Sneath PHA, Sokal RR, 1973. Numerical taxonomy, the principles and practice of numerical classification. San Francisco: WH Freeman.
58. Sutherland WJ, de Jong MCM, 1991. The evolutionarily stable strategy for secondary sexual characters. Behav Ecol 2:16-20.
59. Svensson L, 1984. Identification guide to European passerines. Stockholm: L. Svensson.
60. Taylor LR, 1963. Analysis of the effect of temperature on insects in flight. J Anim Ecol 32:99-117.
61. Thomas ALR, 1993. On the aerodynamics of birds' tails. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 340:361-380.
62. Thomas ALR, 1996. The flight of birds that have wings and a tail: variable geometry expands the envelope of flight performance. J Theor Biol 183:237-245.
63. Thomas ALR, Balmford A, 1995. How natural selection shapes birds's tails. Am Nat 146:848-868.
64. Thomas ALR, Rowe L, 1997. Experimental tests on tail elongation and sexual selection in swallows (Hirundo rustica) do not affect the tail streamer and cannot test its function. Behav Ecol 8:580-581.
65. Turner AK, 1980. The use of time and energy by aerial feeding birds (PhD thesis). Stirling, UK: University of Stirling.
66. Turner AK, 1982. Optimal foraging by the swallow: prey size selection. Anim Behav 30:862-872.
67. Welham CVJ, 1994. Flight speeds of migrating birds: a test of maximum range speed predictions from three aerodynamic equations. Behav Ecol 5:1-8.
68. Wigglesworth VB, 1972. The principles of insect physiology, 7th ed. London: Chapman and Hall.
69. Zahavi A, 1975. Mate selection - a selection for a handicap. J Theor Biol 53:205-214.