The analysis of common cuckoo's egg shape in relation to its hosts' in two geographically distant areas

Journal of Zoology

Volumn 284, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 77-83

  Ban M ^a   Barta, Z ^a   Munoz A R ^b,e   Takasu, F ^b   Nakamura, H ^c   Moskat C ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF DEBRECEN   (Hungary)

^b NARA WOMEN'S UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^c SHINSHU UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^d INSTITUTE OF EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE   (Hungary)

^e Fundación Migres Complejo Huerta Grande   (Spain)

Author keywords

Adaptation; Brood parasitism; Coevolution; Egg shape; Mimicry

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; BIRD; BROOD PARASITISM; COEVOLUTION; EGG; GENET; GEOGRAPHICAL VARIATION; HOST-PARASITE INTERACTION; INCUBATION; MIMICRY;

HUNGARY; JAPAN;

ACROCEPHALUS; ACROCEPHALUS ARUNDINACEUS; ACROCEPHALUS ORIENTALIS; ACROCEPHALUS PALUSTRIS; CUCULUS CANORUS; EMBERIZA SPODOCEPHALA; ERITHACUS RUBECULA; LANIUS BUCEPHALUS;

EID: 79956141393     PISSN: 09528369     EISSN: 14697998     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-7998.2011.00795.x     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Abramoff, M.D., Magelhaes, P.J. & Ram, S.J. (2004). Image processing with ImageJ. Biophoton. Int. 11, 36-42.
2. Andersson, M. (1978). Optimal egg shape in waders. Ornis. Fenn. 55, 105-109.
3. Antonov, A., Stokke, B.G., Moksnes, A., Kleven, O., Honza, M. & Røskaft, E. (2006). Eggshell strength of an obligate brood parasite: a test of the puncture resistance hypothesis. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 60, 11-18.
4. Antonov, A., Stokke, B.G., Vikan, J.R., Fossøy, F., Ranke, P.S., Røskaft, E., Moksnes, A., Møller, A.P. & Shykoff, J.A. (2010). Egg phenotype differentiation in sympatric cuckoo Cuculus canorus gentes. J. Evol. Biol. 23, 1170-1182.
5. Avilés, J.M. (2008). Egg colour mimicry in the common cuckoo Cuculus canorus as revealed by modelling host retinal function. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. Ser. B 275, 2345-2352.
6. Avilés, J.M. & Møller, A.P. (2003). Meadow pipit (Anthus pratensis) egg appearance in cuckoo (Cuculus canorus) sympatric and allopatric populations. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 79, 543-549.
7. Avilés, J.M. & Møller, A.P. (2004). How is host egg mimicry maintained in the cuckoo (Cuculus canorus)? Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 82, 57-68.
8. Avilés, J.M., Vikan, J.R., Fossøy, F., Antonov, A., Moksnes, A., Røskaft, E. & Stokke, B.G. (2010). Avian colour perception predicts behavioural responses to experimental brood parasitism in chaffinches. J. Evol. Biol. 23, 293-301.
9. Baker, E.C.S. (1942). Cuckoo problems. London: Witherby.
10. Barta, Z. & Székely, T. (1997). The optimal shape of avian eggs. Funct. Ecol. 11, 656-662.
11. Birkhead, T.R., Hemmings, N., Spottiswoode, C.N., Mikulica, O., Moskát, C., Bán, M. & Schulze-Hagen, K. (2010). Internal incubation and early hatching in brood parasitic birds. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. Ser. B.. (Online DOI: DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2010.1504).
12. Cassey, P., Ewen, J.G., Marshall, N.J., Vorobyev, M., Blackburn, T.M. & Hauber, M.E. (2009). Are avian eggshell colours effective intraspecific communication signals in the Muscicapoidea? A perceptual modelling approach. Ibis 151, 689-698.
13. Cassey, P., Honza, M., Grim, T. & Hauber, M.E. (2008). The modelling of avian visual perception predicts behavioural rejection responses to foreign egg colours. Biol. Lett. 4, 515-517.
14. Cassey, P., Portugal, S.J., Maurer, G., Ewen, J.G., Boulton, R.L., Hauber, M.E. & Blackburn, T.M. (2010). Variability in avian eggshell colour: a comparative study of museum eggshells. PLoS ONE 5, e12054.
15. Cherry, M.I. & Bennett, A.T.D. (2001). Egg colour matching in an African cuckoo as revealed by ultraviolet-visible reflectance spectrophotometry. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. Ser. B 268, 565-571.
16. Cherry, M.I., Bennett, A.T.D. & Moskát, C. (2007). Host intra-clutch variation, cuckoo egg matching and egg rejection by great reed warblers. Naturwissenschaftlichen 94, 441-447.
17. Cherry, M.I. & Gosler, A.G. (2010). Avian eggshell coloration: new perspectives on adaptive explanations. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 100, 753-762.
18. Davies, N.B. (2000). Cuckoos, cowbirds and other cheats. London: T. A. & D. Poyser.
19. Davies, N.B. & Brooke, M.de L. (1988). Cuckoos versus reed warblers: adaptations and counteradaptations. Anim. Behav. 36, 262-284.
20. Davies, N.B. & Brooke, M.de L. (1989). An experimental study of coevolution between the cuckoo Cuculus canorus and its hosts. II. Host egg markings, chick discrimination and general discussion. J. Anim. Ecol. 58, 225-236.
21. Dawkins, N.B. & Krebs, J.R. (1979). Arms races between and within species. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. Ser. B 205, 489-511.
22. Drent, R. (1975). Incubation. In Avian biology, vol. 5: 333-420. Farner, D.S., King, J.R. & Parkes, K.C. (Eds). New York: Academic Press.
23. Edvardsen, E., Moksnes, A., Røskaft, E., Øien, I.J. & Honza, M. (2001). Egg mimicry in cuckoos parasitizing four sympatric species of Acrocephalus warblers. Condor 103, 829-837.
24. Endler, J.A. & Mielke, P.W. (2005). Comparing entire colour patterns as birds see them. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 86, 405-431.
25. García-Navas, V., Sanz, J.J., Merino, S., Martínez-de la Puente, J., Lobato, E., del Cerro, S., Rivero, J., de Castaneda, R.R. & Moreno, J. (2011). Experimental evidence for the role of calcium in eggshell pigmentation pattern and breeding performance in Blue Tits Cyanistes caeruleus. J Ornithol 152, 71-82.
26. Guigueno, M.F. & Sealy, S.G. (2009). Nest sanitation plays a role in egg burial of yellow warblers. Ethology 115, 247-256.
27. Hargitai, R., Moskát, C., Bán, M., Gil, D., López-Rull, I. & Solymos, E. (2010). Eggshell characteristics and yolk composition in the common cuckoo Cuculus canorus:are they adapted to brood parasitism? J. Avian. Biol. 41, 177-185.
28. Hauber, M.E., Moskát, C. & Bán, M. (2006). Experimental shift in hosts' acceptance threshold of inaccurate-mimic brood parasite eggs. Biol. Lett. 2, 177-180.
29. Honza, M., Polačiková, L. & Procházka, P. (2007). Ultraviolet and green parts of the colour spectrum affect egg rejection in the song thrush (Turdus philomelos). Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 92, 269-276.
30. Honza, M., Taborsky, B., Taborsky, M., Teuschl, Y., Vogl, W., Moksnes, A. & Røskaft, E. (2002). Behaviour of female common cuckoos, Cuculus canorus, in the vicinity of host nests before and during egg laying: a radio telemetry study. Anim. Behav. 64, 861-868.
31. Igic, B., Greenwood, D.R., Palmer, D.J., Cassey, P., Gill, B.J., Grim, T., Brennan, P.L.R., Bassett, S.M., Battley, P.F. & Hauber, M.E. (2010). Detecting pigments from colourful eggshells of extinct birds. Chemoecology 20, 43-48.
32. Kilner, R.M. (2005). The evolution of virulence in brood parasites. Ornithol. Sci. 4, 55-64.
33. Kilner, R.M. (2006). The evolution of egg colour and patterning in birds. Biol. Rev. 81, 383-406.
34. Krüger, O. (2007). Cuckoos, cowbirds and hosts: adaptations, trade-offs and constraints. Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. B 362, 1873-1886.
35. Lack, D. (1968). Ecological adaptations for breeding in birds. London: Methuen.
36. Lahti, D.C. & Lahti, A.R. (2002). How precise is egg discrimination in weaverbirds? Anim. Behav. 63, 1135-1142.
37. Landstrom, M.T., Heinsohn, R. & Langmore, N.E. (2010). Clutch variation and egg rejection in three hosts of the pallid cuckoo, Cuculus pallidus. Behaviour 147, 19-36.
38. Langmore, N.E., Hunt, S. & Kilner, R.M. (2003). Escalation of a coevolutionary arms race through host rejection of brood parasitic young. Nature 422, 157-160.
39. López-de-Hierro, M.D.G. & Moreno-Rueda, G. (2010). Egg-spot pattern rather than egg colour affects conspecific egg rejection in the house sparrow (Passer domesticus). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 64, 317-324.
40. Mao, K.-M., Murakami, A., Iwasawa, A. & Yoshizaki, N. (2007). The asymmetry of avian egg-shape: an adaptation for reproduction on dry land. J. Anat. 210, 741-748.
41. Marchetti, K. (2000). Egg rejection in a passerine bird: size does matter. Anim. Behav. 59, 877-883.
42. Mason, P. & Rothstein, S.I. (1986). Coevolution and avian brood parasitism: cowbird eggs show evolutionary response to host discrimination. Evolution 40, 1207-1214.
43. Moksnes, A. & Røskaft, E. (1995). Egg-morphs and host preference in the common cuckoo Cuculus canorus: an analysis of cuckoo and host eggs from European museum collections. J. Zool. 236, 625-648.
44. Moksnes, A., Røskaft, E., Braa, A.T., Korsnes, L., Lampe, H.M. & Pedersen, H.C. (1991). Behavioural responses of potential hosts towards artificial cuckoo eggs and dummies. Behaviour 116, 64-89.
45. Mónus, F. & Barta, Z. (2005). Repeatability analysis of egg shape in a wild tree sparrow (Passer montanus) population: a sensitive method for egg shape description. Acta. Zool. Acad. Sci. Hung. 51, 151-162.
46. Moskát, C., Avilés, J.M., Bán, M., Hargitai, R. & Zölei, A. (2008a). Experimental support for the use of egg uniformity in parasite egg discrimination by cuckoo hosts. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 62, 1885-1890.
47. Moskát, C., Székely, T., Cuthill, I.C. & Kisbenedek, T. (2008b). Hosts' responses to parasitic eggs: which cues elicit hosts' egg discrimination? Ethology 114, 186-194.
48. Moskát, C., Székely, T., Kisbenedek, T., Karcza, Z. & Bártol, I. (2003). The importance of nest cleaning in egg rejection behaviour of great reed warblers Acrocephalus arundinaceus. J. Avian Biol. 34, 16-19.
49. Nakamura, H., Kubota, S. & Suzuki, R. (1998). Coevolution among the common cuckoo and their major hosts in Japan. In Parasitic birds and their hosts: 94-112. Rothstein, S.I. & Robinson, S.K. (Eds). New York: Oxford University Press.
50. Nakamura, H. & Miyazawa, Y. (1997). Movements, space use, and social organization of radio-tracked common cuckoos during the breeding season in Japan. Jpn. J. Ornithol. 46, 23-54.
51. Ortega, C.P. & Cruz, A. (1988). Mechanisms of egg acceptance by marsh-dwelling blackbirds. Condor 90, 349-358.
52. Polačiková, L. & Grim, T. (2010). Blunt egg pole holds cues for alien egg discrimination: experimental evidence. J. Avian Biol. 41, 111-116.
53. R Development Core Team. (2009). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. ISBN 3-900051-07-0. Vienna: R Development Core Team. Available at
54. Rothstein, S.I. (1975). Mechanisms of avian egg recognition: do birds know their own eggs? Anim. Behav. 23, 268-278.
55. Spottiswoode, C.N. (2010). The evolution of host-specific variation in cuckoo eggshell strength. J. Evol. Biol. 23, 1792-1799.
56. Spottiswoode, C.N. & Stevens, M. (2010). Visual modeling shows that avian host parents use multiple visual cues in rejecting parasitic eggs. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 107, 8672-8676.
57. Stoddard, M.C. & Stevens, M. (2010). Pattern mimicry of host eggs by the common cuckoo, as seen through a bird's eye. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. Ser. B 277, 1387-1393.
58. Stokke, B.G., Moksnes, A., Røskaft, E., Rudolfsen, G. & Honza, M. (1999). Rejection of artificial cuckoo (Cuculus canorus) eggs in relation to variation in egg appearance among reed warblers (Acrocephalus scirpaceus). Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B 266, 1483-1488.
59. Takasu, F., Moskát, C., Munoz, A.R., Imanishi, S. & Nakamura, H. (2009). Adaptations in the common cuckoo (Cuculus canorus) to host eggs in a multiple-hosts system of brood parasitism. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 98, 291-300.
60. Thompson, D.W. (1942). On growth and form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
61. Todd, P.H. & Smart, I.H.M. (1984). The shape of birds' eggs. J. Theor. Biol. 106, 239-243.
62. Underwood, T.J. & Sealy, S.G. (2002). Adaptive significance of egg coloration. In Avian incubation: 280-298. Deeming, D.C. (Ed). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
63. Underwood, T.J. & Sealy, S.G. (2006). Influence of shape on egg discrimination in American robins and gray catbirds. Ethology 112, 164-173.
64. Vikan, J.R., Stokke, B.G., Fossey, F., Jackson, C., Huhta, E., Rutila, J., Moksnes, A. & Røskaft, E. (2009). Fixed rejection responses to single and multiple experimental parasitism in two Fringilla hosts of the common cuckoo. Ethology 115, 840-850.
65. Wyllie, I. (1981). The cuckoo. London: Batsford.