Semiochemical compounds of preen secretion reflect genetic make-up in a seabird species

Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Volumn 279, Issue 1731, 2012, Pages 1185-1193

  Leclaire, Sarah ^a,b   Merkling, Thomas ^a,b   Raynaud, Christine ^c,d   Mulard, Hervé ^a,b   Bessiere, Jean Marie ^e   Lhuillier, É Meline ^a,b   Hatch, Scott A ^f   Danchin, Ét ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITÉ PAUL SABATIER   (France)

^b UNIVERSITÉ DE TOULOUSE   (France)

^c UNIVERSITÉ DE TOULOUSE   (France)

^d UNIVERSITÉ DE TOULOUSE   (France)

^e Ecole Nationale Supe rieure de Chimie de Montpellier   (France)

^f U S GEOLOGICAL SURVEY   (United States)

Author keywords

Birds; Black legged kittiwake; Genetic compatibility; Heterozygosity; Olfactory communication

Indexed keywords

CHEMICAL CUE; CONSPECIFIC; GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY; GENETIC ANALYSIS; GENETIC MARKER; GENETIC STRUCTURE; HETEROZYGOSITY; MATE CHOICE; ODOR; OLFACTION; RELATEDNESS; SEABIRD; SECRETION; SEMIOCHEMICAL; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR;

AVES; LARUS; RISSA TRIDACTYLA; VERTEBRATA;

EID: 84856792093     PISSN: 09628452     EISSN: 14712970     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2011.1611     Document Type: Article

References (88)

1. Andersson, M. 1994 Sexual selection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
2. Mays, H. L. & Hill, G. E. 2004 Choosing mates: good genes versus genes that are a good fit. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19, 554-559. (doi:10.1016/j.tree.2004.07.018)
3. Neff, B. D. & Pitcher, T. E. 2005 Genetic quality and sexual selection: an integrated framework for good genes and compatible genes. Mol. Ecol. 14, 19-38. (doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2004.02395.x)
4. Ekblom, R., Saether, S. A., Grahn, M., Fiske, P., Kalas, J. A. & Hoglund, J. 2004 Major histocompatibility complex variation and mate choice in a lekking bird, the great snipe (Gallinago media). Mol. Ecol. 13, 3821-3828. (doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2004.02361.x)
5. Eizaguirre, C., Yeates, S. E., Lenz, T. L., Kalbe, M. & Milinski, M. 2009 MHC-based mate choice combines good genes and maintenance of MHC polymorphism. Mol. Ecol. 18, 3316-3329. (doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2009.04243.x)
6. Schwensow, N., Fietz, J., Dausmann, K. & Sommer, S. 2008 MHC-associated mating strategies and the importance of overall genetic diversity in an obligate pair-living primate. Evol. Ecol. 22, 617-636. (doi:10.1007/s10682-007-9186-4)
7. Husseneder, C. & Simms, D. M. 2008 Size and heterozygosity influence partner selection in the Formosan subterranean termite. Behav. Ecol. 19, 764-773. (doi:10.1093/beheco/arn041)
8. Roberts, S. C. & Gosling, L. M. 2003 Genetic similarity and quality interact in mate choice decisions by female mice. Nat. Genet. 35, 103-106. (doi:10.1038/ng1231)
9. Tregenza, T. & Wedell, N. 2000 Genetic compatibility,mate choice andpatterns ofparentage: invited review. Mol. Ecol. 9, 1013-1027. (doi:10.1046/j.1365-294x.2000.00964.x)
10. Freeman-Gallant, C. R., Meguerdichian, M., Wheelwright, N. T. & Sollecito, S. V. 2003 Social pairing and female mating fidelity predicted by restriction fragment length polymorphism similarity at the major histocompatibility complex in a songbird. Mol. Ecol. 12, 3077-3083. (doi:10.1046/j.1365-294X.2003.01968.x)
11. Olsson, M., Madsen, T., Nordby, J., Wapstra, E., Ujvari, B. & Wittsell, H. 2003 Major histocompatibility complex and mate choice in sand lizards. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 270, S254-S256. (doi:10.1098/rsbl.2003.0079)
12. Ditchkoff, S. S., Lochmiller, R. L., Masters, R. E., Hoofer, S. R. & Van Den Bussche, R. A. 2001 Majorhistocompatibility-complex-associated variation in secondary sexual traits of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus): evidence for good-genes advertisement. Evolution 55, 616-625. (doi:10.1554/0014-3820(2001)055[0616:MHCAVI]2.0.CO;2)
13. Charpentier, M. J. E., Crawford, J. C., Boulet, M. & Drea, C. M. 2010 Message 'scent': lemurs detect the genetic relatedness and quality of conspecifics via olfactory cues. Anim. Behav. 80, 101-108. (doi:10.1016/j. anbehav.2010.04.005)
14. Thom, M. D., Stockley, P., Jury, F., Ollier, W. E. R., Beynon, R. J. & Hurst, J. L. 2008 The direct assessment of genetic heterozygosity through scent in the mouse. Curr. Biol. 18, 619-623. (doi:10.1016/j.cub.2008.03.056)
15. Hoikkala, A., Aspi, J. & Suvanto, L. 1998 Male courtship song frequency as an indicator of male genetic quality in an insect species, Drosophila montana. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 265, 503-508. (doi:10.1098/rspb.1998.0323)
16. Van Oosterhout, C., Trigg, R. E., Carvalho, G. R., Magurran, A. E., Hauser, L. & Shaw, P.W. 2003 Inbreeding depression and genetic load of sexually selected traits: how the guppy lost its spots. J. Evol. Biol. 16, 273-281. (doi:10.1046/j.1420-9101.2003.00511.x)
17. Wedekind, C., Seebeck, T., Bettens, F. & Paepke, A. J. 1995 MHC-dependent mate preferences in humans. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 260, 245-249. (doi:10.1098/rspb.1995.0087)
18. Radwan, J., Tkacz, A. & Kloch, A. 2008 MHC and preferences for male odour in the bank vole. Ethology 114, 827-833. (doi:10.1111/j.1439-0310.2008.01528.x)
19. Yamazaki, K., Yamaguchi, M., Baranoski, L., Bard, J., Boyse, E. A. & Thomas, L. 1979 Recognition among mice: evidence from the use of a Y-maze differentially scented by congenic mice of different major histocompatibility types. J. Exp. Med. 150, 755-760. (doi:10.1084/ jem.150.4.755)
20. Parrott, M. L., Ward, S. J. & Temple-Smith, P. D. 2007 Olfactory cues, genetic relatedness and female mate choice in the agile antechinus (Antechinus agilis). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 61, 1075-1079. (doi:10.1007/s00265-006-0340-8)
21. Olsen, K. H., Grahn, M., Lohm, J. & Langefors, A. 1998 MHC and kin discrimination in juvenile Arctic charr, Salvelinus alpinus (L.). Anim. Behav. 56, 319-327. (doi:10.1006/anbe.1998.0837)
22. Setchell, J. M., Vaglio, S., Abbott, K. M., Moggi-Cecchi, J., Boscaro, F., Pieraccini, G. & Knapp, L. A. 2011 Odour signals major histocompatibility complex genotype in an Old World monkey. Proc. R. Soc. B 278, 274-280. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2010.0571)
23. Bonneaud, C., Mazuc, J., Chastel, O., Westerdahl, H. & Sorci, G. 2004 Terminal investment induced by immune challenge and fitness traits associated with major histocompatibility complex in the house sparrow. Evolution 58, 2823-2830.
24. Westerdahl, H., Waldenstrom, J., Hansson, B., Hasselquist, D., von Schantz, T. & Bensch, S. 2005 Associations between malaria and MHC genes in a migratory songbird. Proc. R. Soc. B 272, 1511-1518. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2005.3113)
25. Wedekind, C., Walker, M., Portmann, J., Cenni, B., Muller, R. & Binz, T. 2004 MHC-linked susceptibility to a bacterial infection, but no MHC-linked cryptic female choice in whitefish. J. Evol. Biol. 17, 11-18. (doi:10.1046/j.1420-9101.2004.00669.x)
26. Penn, D. J. 2002 The scent of genetic compatibility: sexual selection and the major histocompatibility complex. Ethology 108, 1-21. (doi:10.1046/j.1439-0310.2002.00768.x)
27. Willse, A., Kwak, J., Yamazaki, K., Preti, G., Wahl, J. H. & Beauchamp, G. K. 2006 Individual odortypes: interaction of MHC and background genes. Immunogenetics 58, 967-982. (doi:10.1007/s00251-006-0162-x)
28. Cheetham, S. A., Thom, M. D., Jury, F., Ollier, W. E. R., Beynon, R. J. & Hurst, J. L. 2007 The genetic basis of individual-recognition signals in the mouse. Curr. Biol. 17, 1771-1777. (doi:10.1016/j.cub.2007.10.007)
29. Charpentier, M. J. E., Boulet, M. & Drea, C. M. 2008 Smelling right: the scent of male lemurs advertises genetic quality and relatedness. Mol. Ecol. 17, 3225-3233. (doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2008.03831.x)
30. Sun, L. X. & Muller-Schwarze, D. 1998 Anal gland secretion codes for relatedness in the beaver, Castor canadensis. Ethology 104, 917-927. (doi:10.1111/j.1439-0310.1998.tb00041.x)
31. Boulet, M., Charpentier, M. J. E. & Drea, C. M. 2009 Decoding an olfactory mechanism of kin recognition and inbreeding avoidance in a primate. BMC Evol. Biol. 9, 281. (doi:10.1186/1471-2148-9-281)
32. Liu, D. Z., Wei, R. P., Zhang, G. Q., Yuan, H., Wang, Z. P., Sun, L. X., Zhang, J. X. & Zhang, H. M. 2008 Male panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) urine contains kinship information. Chin. Sci. Bull. 53, 2793-2800. (doi:10.1007/s11434-008-0373-7)
33. Mulard, H., Danchin, E., Talbot, S. L., Ramey, A. M., Hatch, S. A., White, J. F., Helfenstein, F. & Wagner, R. H. 2009 Evidence that pairing with genetically similar mates is maladaptive in a monogamous bird. BMC Evol. Biol. 9, 147. (doi:10.1186/1471-2148-9-147)
34. Bonneaud, C., Chastel, O., Federici, P., Westerdahl, H. & Sorci, G. 2006 Complex MHC-based mate choice in a wild passerine. Proc. R. Soc. B 273, 1111-1116. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2005.3325)
35. Foerster, K., Delhey, K., Johnsen, A., Lifjeld, J. T. & Kempenaers, B. 2003 Females increase offspring heterozygosity and fitness through extra-pair matings. Nature 425, 714-717. (doi:10.1038/nature01969)
36. Ryder, T. B., Tori, W. P., Blake, J. G., Loiselle, B. A. & Parker, P. G. 2010 Mate choice for genetic quality: a test of the heterozygosity and compatibility hypothesesin a lek-breeding bird. Behav. Ecol. 21, 203-210. (doi:10.1093/beheco/arp176)
37. Garcia-Navas, V., Ortego, J. & Sanz, J. J. 2009 Heterozygosity-based assortative mating in blue tits (Cyanistes caeruleus): implications for the evolution of mate choice. Proc. R. Soc. B 276, 2931-2940. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2009.0417)
38. Dreiss, A. N., Silva, N., Richard, M., Moyen, F., Thery, M., Moller, A. P. & Danchin, E. 2008 Conditiondependent genetic benefits of extrapair fertilization in female blue tits Cyanistes caeruleus. J. Evol. Biol. 21, 1814-1822. (doi:10.1111/j.1420-9101.2008.01578.x)
39. Griggio, M., Biard, C., Penn, D. J. & Hoi, H. 2011 Female house sparrows 'count on' male genes: experimental evidence for MHC-dependent mate preference in birds. BMC Evol. Biol. 11, (doi:10.1186/1471-2148-11-44)
40. Arct, A., Rutkowska, J., Martyka, R., Drobniak, S. M. & Cichon, M. 2010 Kin recognition and adjustment of reproductive effort in zebra finches. Biol. Lett. 6, 762-764. (doi:10.1098/rsbl.2010.0417)
41. Potvin, D. A. & MacDougall-Shackleton, E. A. 2009 Parental investment amplifies effects of genetic complementarity on growth rates in song sparrows, Melospiza melodia. Anim. Behav. 78, 943-948. (doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2009.07.023)
42. Leclaire, S., White, J., Arnoux, E., Faivre, B., Vetter, N., Hatch, S. A. & Danchin, E. 2011 Integument coloration signals reproductive success, heterozygosity and antioxidant levels in chick-rearing black-legged kittiwakes. Naturwissenschaften 98, 773-782. (doi:10.1007/s00114-011-0827-7)
43. Bolund, E., Martin, K., Kempenaers, B. & Forstmeier, W. 2010 Inbreeding depression of sexually selected traits and attractiveness in the zebra finch. Anim. Behav. 79, 947-955. (doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2010.01.014)
44. Marshall, R. C., Buchanan, K. L. & Catchpole, C. K. 2003 Sexual selection and individual genetic diversity in a songbird. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 270, S248-S250. (doi:10.1098/rsbl.2003.0081)
45. Mardon, J., Saunders, S. M., Anderson, M. J., Couchoux, C. & Bonadonna, F. 2010 Species, gender, and identity: cracking petrels' sociochemical code. Chem. Senses 35, 309-321. (doi:10.1093/chemse/bjq021)
46. Bonadonna, F., Miguel, E., Grosbois, V., Jouventin, P. & Bessiére, J. M. 2007 Individual odor recognition in birds: an endogenous olfactory signature on petrels' feathers? J. Chem. Ecol. 33, 1819-1829. (doi:10.1007/s10886-007-9345-7)
47. Whittaker, D. J., Soini, H. A., Atwell, J. W., Hollars, C., Novotny, M. V. & Ketterson, E. D. 2010 Songbird chemosignals: volatile compounds in preen gland secretions vary among individuals, sexes, and populations. Behav. Ecol. 21, 608-614. (doi:10.1093/beheco/arq033)
48. Karlsson, A. C., Jensen, P., Elgland, M., Laur, K., Fyrner, T., Konradsson, P. & Laska, M. 2010 Red junglefowl have individual body odors. J. Exp. Biol. 213, 1619-1624. (doi:10.1242/jeb.040279)
49. Leclaire, S., Merkling, T., Raynaud, C., Giacinti, G., Bessiére, J. M., Hatch, S. A. & Danchin, E. 2011 An individual and a sex odor signature in kittiwakes? Study of the semiochemical composition of preen secretion and preen down feathers. Naturwissenschaften 98, 615-624. (doi:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2008.07.002)
50. Balthazart, J. & Taziaux, M. 2009 The underestimated role of olfaction in avian reproduction? Behav. Brain Res. 200, 248-259. (doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2008.08.036)
51. Hagelin, J. C. & Jones, I. L. 2007 Bird odors and other chemical substances: a defense mechanism or overlooked mode of intraspecific communication? Auk 124, 741-761. (doi:10.1642/0004-8038(2007)124 [741:BOAOCS]2.0.CO;2)
52. Balthazart, J. & Schoffeniels, E. 1979 Pheromones are involved in the control of sexual behavior in birds. Naturwissenschaften 66, 55-56. (doi:10.1007/BF00369365)
53. Hirao, A., Aoyama, M. & Sugita, S. 2009 The role of uropygial gland on sexual behavior in domestic chicken Gallus gallus domesticus. Behav. Process. 80, 115-120. (doi:10.1016/j.beproc.2008.10.006)
54. Bonadonna, F. & Nevitt, G. A. 2004 Partner-specific odor recognition in an Antarctic seabird. Science 306, 835. (doi:10.1126/science.1103001)
55. Whittaker, D. J., Reichard, D. G., Dapper, A. L. & Ketterson, E. D. 2009 Behavioral responses of nesting female dark-eyed juncos Junco hyemalis to hetero-and conspecific passerine preen oils. J. Avian Biol. 40, 579-583. (doi:10.1111/j.1600-048X.2009.04813.x)
56. Soini, H. A., Schrock, S. E., Bruce, K. E., Wiesler, D., Ketterson, E. D. & Novotny, M. V. 2007 Seasonal variation in volatile compound profiles of preen gland secretions of the dark-eyed junco (Junco hyemalis). J. Chem. Ecol. 33, 183-198. (doi:10.1007/s10886-006-9210-0)
57. Mulard, H. 2007 Behavioural implications of strict monogamy: individual recognition and genetic bases of mate choice in the black-legged kittiwake, Rissa tridactyla. PhD thesis, Universite ́ Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, France.
58. Acevedo-Whitehouse, K., Gulland, F., Greig, D. & Amos, W. 2003 Disease susceptibility in California sea lions. Nature 422, 35. (doi:10.1038/422035a)
59. Keller, L. F. & Waller, D. M. 2002 Inbreeding effects in wild populations. Trends Ecol. Evol. 17, 230-241. (doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(02)02489-8)
60. Roldan, E.R. S., Cassinello, J., Abaigar, T. & Gomendio, M. 1998 Inbreeding, fluctuating asymmetry, and ejaculate quality in an endangered ungulate. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 265, 243-248. (doi:10.1098/rspb.1998.0288)
61. Leclaire, S., Mulard, H., Wagner, R. H., Hatch, S. A. & Danchin, E. 2009 Can Kittiwakes smell? Experimental evidence in a Larid species. Ibis 151, 584-587. (doi:10.1111/j.1474-919X.2009.00935.x)
62. Gill, V. A. & Hatch, S. A. 2002 Components of productivity in black-legged kittiwakes Rissa tridactyla: response to supplemental feeding. J. Avian Biol. 33, 113-126. (doi:10.1034/j.1600-048X.2002.330201.x)
63. Jodice, P. G. R., Lanctot, R. B., Gill, V. A., Roby, D. D. & Hatch, S. A. 2000 Sexing adult black-legged kittiwakes by DNA, behavior, and morphology. Waterbirds 23, 405-415.
64. Jordan, N. R., Mwanguhya, F., Kyabulima, S., Ruedi, P. & Cant, M. A. 2010 Scent marking within and between groups of wild banded mongooses. J. Zool. 280, 72-83. (doi:10.1111/j.1469-7998.2009.00646.x)
65. Lawson, R. E., Putman, R. J. & Fielding, A. H. 2001 Chemical communication in Eurasian deer (Cervidae): do individual odours also code for attributes? J. Zool. 253, 91-99. (doi:10.1017/S0952836901000085)
66. McCune, B., Grace, J. B. & Urban, D. L. 2002 Analysis of ecological communities. Gleneden Beach, OR: MjM Software Design.
67. Legendre, P. & Legendre, L. 1998 Numerical ecology. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science BV.
68. Hurst, J.L. & Beynon, R. J. 2010 Making progress in genetic kin recognition among vertebrates. J. Biol. 9, 13. (doi:10.1186/jbiol221)
69. Longmire, J. et al. 1988 Isolation and molecular characterization of a highly polymorphic centromeric tandem repeat in the family Falconidae. Genomics 2, 14-24. (doi:10.1016/0888-7543(88)90104-8)
70. Vali, U., Einarsson, A., Waits, L. & Ellegren, H. 2008 To what extent do microsatellite markers reflect genome-widegenetic diversity in natural populations? Mol. Ecol. 17, 3808-3817. (doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2008.03876.x)
71. Amos, W., WorthingtonWilmer, J., Fullard, K., Burg, T.M., Croxall, J. P., Bloch, D. & Coulson, T. 2001 The influence of parental relatedness on reproductive success. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 268, 2021-2027. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2001.1751)
72. Belkhir, K., Castric, V. & Bonhomme, F. 2002 IDENTIX, a software to test for relatedness in a population using permutation methods. Mol. Ecol. Notes 2, 611-614. (doi:10.1046/j.1471-8286.2002.00273.x)
73. Mathieu, E., Autem, M., Roux, M. & Bonhomme, F. 1990 E ́preuves de la validation dans l'analyse de structures ge ́ne ́tiques multivarie ́es: comment tester l'e ́quilibre panmictique? Revue de statistiques applique ́es 38, 47-66.
74. Queller, D. C. & Goodnight, K. F. 1989 Estimating relatedness using genetic markers. Evolution 43, 258-275. (doi:10.2307/2409206)
75. misctextR Development Core Team/misctext. 2008 R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
76. Ilmonen, P., Stundner, G., Thoss, M. & Penn, D. J. 2009 Females prefer the scent of outbred males: good-genesas-heterozygosity? BMC Evol. Biol. 9, (doi:10.1186/1471-2148-9-104)
77. Boehm, T. & Zufall, F. 2006 MHC peptides and the sensory evaluation of genotype. Trends Neurosci. 29, 100-107. (doi:10.1016/j.tins.2005.11.006)
78. Takahashi, A., Tsaur, S.-C., Coyne, J. & Wu, I. 2001 The nucleotide changes governing cuticular hydrocarbon variation and their evolution in Drosophila melanogaster. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 98, 3920-3925. (doi:10.1073/pnas.061465098)
79. Roelofs, W. & Rooney, A. 2003 Molecular genetics and evolution of pheromone biosynthesis in Lepidoptera. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100, 9179-9184. (doi:10.1073/pnas.1233767100)
80. Whittaker, D. J., Richmond, K. M., Miller, A. K., Kiley, R., Burns, C. B., Atwell, J. W. & Ketterson, E. D. In press. Intraspecific preen oil odor preferences in darkeyed juncos (Junco hyemalis). Behav. Ecol. (doi:10.1093/beheco/arr122)
81. Mateo, J. M. 2003 Kin recognition in ground squirrels and other rodents. J. Mammal. 84, 1163-1181. (doi:10.1644/BLe-011)
82. Hauber, M. E. & Sherman, P. W. 2001 Self-referent phenotype matching: theoretical considerations and empirical evidence. Trends Neurosci. 24, 609-616. (doi:10.1016/S0166-2236(00)01916-0)
83. Bateson, P. P. G. 1966 Characteristics and context of imprinting. Biol. Rev. Camb. Phil. Soc. 41, 177-217. (doi:10.1111/j.1469-185X.1966.tb01489.x)
84. Penn, D. & Potts, W. 1998 MHC-disassortative mating preferences reversed by cross-fostering. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 265, 1299-1306. (doi:10.1098/rspb.1998.0433)
85. Miller, M. M. et al. 2005 Characterization of two avian MHC-like genes reveals an ancient origin of the CD1 family. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 8674-8679. (doi:10.1073/pnas.0500105102)
86. Salomonsen, J. et al. 2005 Two CD1 genes map to the chicken MHC, indicating that CD1 genes are ancient and likely to have been present in the primordial MHC. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 8668-8673. (doi:10.1073/pnas.0409213102)
87. Porcelli, S. A. & Modlin, R. L. 1999 The CD1 system: antigen-presenting molecules for T cell recognition of lipids and glycolipids. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 17, 297-329. (doi:10.1146/annurev.immunol.17.1.297)
88. Turkish, A. R. & Sturley, S. L. 2009 The genetics of neutral lipid biosynthesis: an evolutionary perspective. Am. J. Physiol. Endocrinol. Metab. 297, E19-E27. (doi:10.1152/ajpendo.90898.2008)