Sex-specific parental strategies according to the sex of offspring in the Adélie penguin

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 20, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 878-883

  Beaulieu, Michaël ^a   Thierry, Anne Mathilde ^a   Raclot, Thierry ^a   Le Maho, Yvon ^a   Ropert Coudert, Yan ^a   Gachot Neveu, Hélne ^a   Ancel, André ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE STRASBOURG   (France)

Author keywords

Biparental care; Foraging strategies; Sex related breeding effort

Indexed keywords

FITNESS; FORAGING BEHAVIOR; PARENTAL CARE; PARENTAL INVESTMENT; REPRODUCTIVE EFFORT; REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGY; RESOURCE AVAILABILITY; SEABIRD; SEX-RELATED DIFFERENCE; SEXUAL DIMORPHISM;

PYGOSCELIS ADELIAE; SPHENISCIDAE;

EID: 67651093973     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arp076     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Ainley DG, DeMaster DP. 1980. Survival and mortality in a population of Adélie penguins. Ecology. 61:522-530.
2. Ainley DG, Schlatter RP. 1972. Chick raising ability in Adélie penguins. Auk. 89:559-566.
3. Ainley DJ, Emison WB. 1972. Sexual size dimorphism in Adélie penguins. Ibis. 114:267-271.
4. Benson J, Suryan RM, Piatt JF. 2003. Assessing chick growth from a single visit to a seabird colony. Mar Ornithol. 31:181-184.
5. Cameron-MacMillan ML, Walsh CJ, Wilhelm SI, Storey AE. 2007. Male chicks are more costly to rear than females in a monogamous seabird, the Common Murre. Behav Ecol. 18:81-85.
6. Clarke A. 1980. The biochemical composition of krill, Euphausia superba Dana, from South Georgia. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol. 43:221-236.
7. Clarke J, Manly B, Kerry K, Gardner H, Franchi E, Corsolini S, Focardi S. 1998. Sex differences in Adélie penguin foraging strategies. Polar Biol. 20:248-258.
8. Clarke JR. 2001. Partitioning of foraging effort in Adélie penguins provisioning chicks at Bechervaise Island, Antarctica. Polar Biol. 24:16-20.
9. Culik B. 1994. Energetic costs of raising Pygoscelid penguin chicks. Polar Biol. 14:205-210.
10. De Leon A, Fargallo JA, Moreno J. 1998. Parental body size affects meal size in the chinstrap penguin (Pygoscelis antarctica). Polar Biol. 19:358-360.
11. Dugger KM, Ballard G, Ainley DG, Barton KJ. 2006. Effects of flipper bands on foraging behavior and survival of Adelie penguins (Pygoscelis adeliae). Auk. 123:858-869.
12. Ellegren H. 1996. First gene on the avian W chromosome (CHD) provides a tag for universal sexing of non-ratite birds. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B Biol Sci. 263:1635-1641.
13. Erikstad KE, Asheim M, Fauchald P, Dahlhaug L, Tveraa T. 1997. Adjustment of parental effort in the puffin; the roles of adult body condition and chick size. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 40:95-100.
14. Gowaty PA. 1996. Field studies of parental care in birds, new data focus questions on variation among females. Adv Study Behav. 25:477-531.
15. Green AJ. 2001. Mass/length residuals: measures of body condition or generators of spurious results? Ecology. 82:1473-1483.
16. Kahn NW, St John J, Quinn TW. 1998. Chromosome-specific intron size differences in the avian CHD gene provide an efficient method for sex identification in birds. Auk. 115:1074-1078.
17. Kerry KR, Clarke JR, Else GD. 1993. Identification of sex of Adélie penguins from observations of incubating birds. Wildl Res. 20:725-732.
18. Lessels CM, Oddie KR, Mateman AC. 1998. Parental behaviour is unrelated to experimentally manipulated great tit brood sex ratio. Anim Behav. 56:385-393.
19. Mauck RA, Grubb TC Jr. 1995. Petrel parents shunt all experimentally increased reproductive costs to their offspring. Anim Behav. 49: 999-1008.
20. Minguez E, Fargallo JA, De Leon A, Moreno J, Moreno E. 1998. Agerelated variations in bill size in chinstrap penguins. Colon Waterbirds. 21:66-68.
21. Nel DC, Taylor F, Ryan PG, Cooper J. 2003. Population dynamics of the wandering albatross Diomedea exulans at Marion Island: longline fishing and environmental influences. Afr J Mar Sci. 25:503-517.
22. Nicol S. 2006. Krill, currents, and sea ice: Euphausia superba and its changing environment. Bioscience. 56:111-120.
23. Renner M, Davis LS. 2000. Marking penguins with implanted transponders. Notornis. 47:163-165.
24. Ricklefs RE. 1987. Response of adult Leach's storm petrel to increased food demand at the nest. Auk. 104:750-756.
25. Ridoux V, Offredo C. 1989. The diets of five summer breeding seabirds in Adélie Land, Antarctica. Polar Biol. 9:137-145.
26. Ropert-Coudert Y, Wilson RP, Daunt F, Kato A. 2004. Patterns of energy acquisition by a central place forager: benefits of alternating short and long foraging trips. Behav Ecol. 15:824-830.
27. Sambrook J, Fritsch EF, Maniatis T. 1989. Amplification methods. Molecular cloning. A laboratory manual. New York: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.
28. Schulte-Hostedde AI, Zinner B, Millar JS, Hickling GJ. 2005. Restitution of mass-size residuals: validating body condition indices. Ecology. 86:155-163.
29. Serrano-Meneses MA, Szekely T. 2006. Sexual size dimorphism in seabirds: sexual selection, fecundity selection and differential nicheutilisation. Oikos. 113:385-394.
30. Siegel V. 2000. Krill demography and variability in abundance and distribution. Can J Fish Aquat Sci. 57:151-167.
31. Spiridonov VA. 1995. Spatial and temporal variability in reproductive timing of Antarctic krill (Euphausia superba Dana). Polar Biol. 15:161-174.
32. Stamps JA. 1990. When should avian parents differentially provision sons and daughters? Am Nat. 135:671-685.
33. Storer RW. 1966. Sexual dimorphism and food habits in three North- American accipiters. Auk. 83:423-436.
34. Sydeman W. 1993. Survivorship of common murres on Southeast Farallon Island, California. Ornis Scand. 24:135-141.
35. Taylor RH. 1962. The Adélie penguin Pygoscelis adeliae at Cape Royds. Ibis. 104:176-204.
36. Teather KL. 1992. An experimental study of competition for food between male and female nestlings of the red-winged blackbird. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 31:81-87.
37. Vleck CM, Bucher TL, Reed WL, Kristmundsdottir AY. 1999. Changes in reproductive hormones and body mass through the reproductive cycle in the Adélie penguin (Pygoscelis adeliae), with associated data on courting-only individuals. In: Adams N, Slotow R, editors. Proceedings of the 22nd International Ornithological Congress. Durban: University of Natal. p. 1210-1223.
38. Von Engelhardt N, Carere C, Dijkstra C, Groothuis TGG. 2006. Sexspecific effects of yolk testosterone on survival, begging and growth of zebra finches. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B Biol Sci. 273:65-70.
39. Weimerskirch H. 1998. How can a pelagic seabird provision its chick when relying on a distant food resource? Cyclic attendance at the colony, foraging decision and body condition in sooty shearwaters. J Anim Ecol. 67:99-109.
40. Weimerskirch H, Barbraud C, Lys P. 2000. Sex differences in parental investment and chick growth in Wandering Albatrosses: fitness consequences. Ecology. 81:309-318.
41. Weimerskirch H, Lys P. 2000. Seasonal changes in the provisioning behaviour and mass of male and female wandering albatrosses in relation to the growth of their chick. Polar Biol. 23: 733-744.
42. Williams GC. 1966. Adaptation and natural selection. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.