The allometric pattern of sexually size dimorphic feather ornaments and factors affecting allometry

Journal of Evolutionary Biology

Volumn 22, Issue 7, 2009, Pages 1503-1515

  Cuervo, J J ^a   Moller A P ^b  

^a DEPARTAMENTO DE ECOLOGÍA FUNCIONAL Y EVOLUTIVA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITÉ PARIS SUD   (France)

Author keywords

Mating system; Migration distance; Ornament size; Ornamental feather; Reduced major axis slope; Static allometry

Indexed keywords

ALLOMETRY; BIRD; ECOLOGICAL MODELING; FEATHER; MIGRATION; ORNAMENTATION; REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGY; SECONDARY SEXUAL CHARACTERISTICS; SEXUAL DIMORPHISM; SEXUAL SELECTION;

AVES;

EID: 67649209955     PISSN: 1010061X     EISSN: 14209101     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2009.01758.x     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Altshuler, D.L., Dudley, R. McGuire, J.A. 2004. Resolution of a paradox: hummingbird flight at high elevation does not come without a cost. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101 : 17731 17736. (Pubitemid 40051955)
2. Andersson, M. 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
3. Balmford, A., Thomas, A.L.R. Jones, I.L. 1993. Aerodynamics and the evolution of long tails in birds. Nature 361 : 628 631.
4. Barker, F.K., Cibois, A., Schikler, P., Feinstein, J. Cracraft, J. 2004. Phylogeny and diversification of the largest avian radiation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101 : 11040 11045. (Pubitemid 38992336)
5. Bennett, P.M. Owens, I.P.F. 2002. Evolutionary Ecology of Birds. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
6. Birkhead, T.R. Møller, A.P. 1992. Sperm Competition in Birds: Evolutionary Causes and Consequences. Academic Press, London, UK.
7. Bonduriansky, R. 2007. Sexual selection and allometry: a critical reappraisal of the evidence and ideas. Evolution 61 : 838 849. (Pubitemid 46537657)
8. Bonduriansky, R. Day, T. 2003. The evolution of static allometry in sexually selected traits. Evolution 57 : 2450 2458. (Pubitemid 37502550)
9. Cohen, J. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences, 2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
10. Chandler, C.R. 1995. Practical considerations in the use of simultaneous inference for multiple tests. Anim. Behav. 49 : 524 527.
11. Cuervo, J.J. Møller, A.P. 1999. Phenotypic variation and fluctuating asymmetry in sexually dimorphic feather ornaments in relation to sex and mating system. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 68 : 505 529. (Pubitemid 30049380)
12. Cuervo, J.J. Møller, A.P. 2000. Sex-limited expression of ornamental feathers in birds. Behav. Ecol. 11 : 246 259. (Pubitemid 30334148)
13. Cuervo, J.J. Møller, A.P. 2001. Components of phenotypic variation in avian ornamental and non-ornamental feathers. Evol. Ecol. 15 : 53 72. (Pubitemid 32983965)
14. Del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. Sargatal, J., eds. 1999. Barn-Owls to Hummingbirds. Handbook of the Birds of the World, Vol. 5. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, Spain.
15. Donne-Goussé, C., Laudet, V. Hänni, C. 2002. A molecular phylogeny of anseriformes based on mitochondrial DNA analysis. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 23 : 339 356. (Pubitemid 34749754)
16. Eberhard, W., Rodriguez, R.L. Polihronakis, M. 2009. Pitfalls in understanding the functional significance of genital allometry. J. Evol. Biol. 22 : 435 445.
17. Echelle, A.F., Echelle, A.E. Fitch, H.S. 1978. Inter- and intraspecific allometry in a display organ: the dewlap of Anolis (Iguanidae) species. Copeia 1978 : 245 250.
18. Frith, C.B. Beehler, B.M. 1998. Birds of Paradise. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
19. Green, A.J. 1992. Positive allometry is likely with mate choice, competitive display and other functions. Anim. Behav. 43 : 170 172.
20. Green, A.J. 1999. Allometry of genitalia in insects and spiders: one size does not fit all. Evolution 53 : 1621 1624.
21. Green, A.J. 2000. The scaling and selection of sexually dimorphic characters: an example using the marbled teal. J. Avian Biol. 31 : 345 350.
22. Grafen, A. 1989. The phylogenetic regression. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond., B, Biol. Sci. 326 : 119 156.
23. Harvey, P.H. Pagel, M.D. 1991. The Comparative Method in Evolutionary Biology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
24. Huxley, J. 1932. Problems of Relative Growth. MacVeagh, London, UK.
25. Kawano, K. 1997. Cost of evolving exaggerated mandibles in stag beetles (Coleoptera: Lucanidae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 90 : 453 461.
26. Kodric-Brown, A., Sibly, R.M. Brown, J.H. 2006. The allometry of ornaments and weapons. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 103 : 8733 8738. (Pubitemid 43878088)
27. Kolm, N., Stein, R.W., Mooers, A.Ø., Verspoor, J.J. Cunningham, E.J.A. 2007. Can sexual selection drive female life histories? A comparative study on Galliform birds. J. Evol. Biol. 20 : 627 638. (Pubitemid 46270591)
28. Lande, R. 1980. Sexual dimorphism, sexual selection and adaptation in polygenic characters. Evolution 34 : 292 305. (Pubitemid 10031375)
29. Larsen, C., Speed, M., Harvey, N. Noyes, H.A. 2007. A molecular phylogeny of the nightjars (Aves: Caprimulgidae) suggests extensive conservation of primitive morphological traits across multiple lineages. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 42 : 789 796. (Pubitemid 46330813)
30. Møller, A.P. Jennions, M.D. 2002. How much variance can be explained by ecologists and evolutionary biologists? Oecologia 132 : 492 500. (Pubitemid 36059163)
31. Moran, M.D. 2003. Arguments for rejecting the sequential Bonferroni in ecological studies. Oikos 100 : 403 405. (Pubitemid 36610487)
32. Norberg, U.M. 1990. Vertebrate Flight: Mechanics, Physiology, Morphology, Ecology and Evolution. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.
33. Nakagawa, S. 2004. A farewell to Bonferroni: the problems of low statistical power and publication bias. Behav. Ecol. 15 : 1044 1045. (Pubitemid 39471217)
34. Nunn, G.B. Cracraft, J. 1996. Phylogenetic relationships among the major lineages of the birds-of-paradise (Paradisaeidae) using mitochondrial DNA gene sequences. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 5 : 445 459. (Pubitemid 126320892)
35. Petrie, M. 1992. Are all secondary sexual display structures positively allometric and, if so, why? Anim. Behav. 43 : 173 175.
36. Purvis, A. Rambaut, A. 1995. Comparative analysis by independent contrasts (caic): an Apple Macintosh application for analysing comparative data. Comput. Appl. Biosci. 11 : 247 251.
37. Rice, W.R. 1989. Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution 43 : 223 225.
38. Rosenberg, M.S. 2002. Fiddler crab claw shape variation: a geometric morphometric analysis across the genus Uca (Crustacea: Brachyura: Ocypodidae). Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 75 : 147 162. (Pubitemid 35054350)
39. Rosenthal, R. 1994. Parametric measures of effect size. In : The Handbook of Research Synthesis (H. Cooper L.V. Hedges, eds pp. 231 244. Russell Sage Foundation, New York, NY.
40. Sheldon, F.H. Winkler, D.W. 1993. Intergeneric phylogenetic relationships of swallows estimated by DNA-DNA hybridization. Auk 110 : 798 824.
41. Sibley, C.G. Ahlquist, J.E. 1990. Phylogeny and Classification of Birds. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.
42. Sokal, R.R. Rohlf, F.J. 1995. Biometry: The Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research, 3rd edn. W.H. Freeman, New York, NY.
43. StatSoft, Inc. 2007. Statistica (Data Analysis Software System). Version 8.0 [www document]. URL http://www.statsoft.com
44. Swaddle, J.P., Witter, M.S. Cuthill, I.C. 1994. The analysis of fluctuating asymmetry. Anim. Behav. 48 : 986 989.
45. Tseng, M. Rowe, L. 1999. Sexual dimorphism and allometry in the giant water strider Gigantometra gigas. Can. J. Zool. 77 : 923 929.
46. Veiga, J.P., Moreno, J., Cordero, P.J. Mínguez, E. 2001. Territory size and polygyny in the spotless starling: resource-holding potential or social inertia? Can. J. Zool. 79 : 1951 1956. (Pubitemid 34190606)