Reproductive effort, molting latitude, and feather color in a migratory songbird

Science

Volumn 306, Issue 5705, 2004, Pages 2249-2250

  Norris, D Ryan ^a,c   Marra, Peter P ^b   Montgomerie, Robert ^a   Kyser, T Kurt ^a   Ratcliffe, Laurene M ^a  

^a QUEEN S UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b SMITHSONIAN ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ECOLOGY; ECOSYSTEMS; ISOTOPES;

ANNUAL CYCLE; BREEDING SEASON; MIGRATORY SONGBIRDS; REPRODUCTION;

BIODIVERSITY;

CAROTENOID; HYDROGEN;

COLOR; FEATHER; MIGRATORY SPECIES; MOLT; REPRODUCTIVE EFFORT; SONGBIRD;

ARTICLE; BREEDING; COLOR; CONCENTRATION (PARAMETERS); FEATHER; LATITUDE; LIGHT; MIGRATION; MOLTING; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REPRODUCTION; SONGBIRD;

ANIMAL MIGRATION; ANIMALS; BREEDING; CAROTENOIDS; FEATHERS; FEMALE; HYDROGEN; ISOTOPES; LIFE CYCLE STAGES; MALE; MOLTING; PIGMENTATION; REPRODUCTION; SEASONS; SONGBIRDS; TIME FACTORS;

ANIMALIA; PASSERI; SETOPHAGA; SETOPHAGA RUTICILLA;

EID: 11144344916     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.1103542     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. R. B. Payne, in Avian Biology, Vol. 2, D. S. Farner, J. R. King, Eds. (Academic Press, New York, 1972), pp. 103-155.
2. T. W. Sherry, R. T. Holmes, in The Birds of North America, No. 277, A. Poole, F. Gill, Eds. (Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, PA, 1997), pp. 1-31.
3. Materials and methods are available as supporting material on Science Online.
4. K. A. Hobson, L. I. Wassenaar, Oecologia 109, 142 (1997).
5. L. I. Wassenaar, K. A. Hobson, Environ. Sci. Technol. 35, 1845 (2001).
6. 2.27 = 0.95, P = 0.40), so data collected from 2002-2004 were pooled.
7. To calculate reproductive effort, we added the z scores (standardized by year) of fledging date (timing of breeding) and the number of young raised, then added 1.0 to each score to remove negative values, allowing individuals that did not fledge young to be assigned a score of zero. Thus, the highest scores for reproductive effort represented individuals that fledged many young late in the breeding season.
8. L. Saks et al., Funct. Ecol. 17, 555 (2003).
9. P. P. Marra, K. A. Hobson, R. T. Holmes, Science 282, 1884 (1998).
10. D. R. Norris et al., Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 271, 59 (2004).
11. K. J. McGraw, D. R. Ardia, Am. Nat. 162, 704 (2003).
12. G. E. Hill, A Red Bird in a Brown Bag: The Function and Evolution of Colorful Plumage in the House Finch (Oxford Univ. Press, New York, 2002).
13. G. E. Hill, J. Avian Biol. 31, 559 (2000).
14. D. R. Rubenstein et al., Science 295, 1062 (2002).
15. G. R. Graves, C. S. Romanek, A. R. Navarro, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 99, 8096 (2002).
16. R. T. Holmes, T. W. Sherry, in Ecology and Conservation of Neotropical Migrant Landbirds, J. M. Hagan III, D. W. Johnston, Eds. (Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC, 1992), pp. 563-575.
17. We thank K. Klassen, A. Vuletich, and K. Scott for help analyzing feather samples and K. Langin, D. White, and many others for excellent field assistance. Supported by NSF grant 0089565 (P.P.M.), the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (L.M.R., T.K.K., R.M., and D.R.N.), the Canadian Foundation for Innovation and Ontario Innovation Trust (T.K.K. and L.M.R.), the Smithsonian Institution (P.P.M. and D.R.N.), and the American Museum of Natural History (D.R.N.).