Population differences in density and resource allocation of ornamental tail feathers in the barn swallow

Biological Journal of the Linnean Society

Volumn 105, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 925-936

  Aparicio, José Miguel ^a   Muñoz, Alberto ^b,c   Bonal, Raúl ^a   Møller, Anders Pape ^d  

^a CSIC   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSIDAD COMPLUTENSE DE MADRID   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITAT AUTÒNOMA DE BARCELONA   (Spain)

^d UNIVERSITÉ PARIS SUD   (France)

Author keywords

Aerodynamics; Fisherian process; Flight; Handicap; Migration; Sexual selection

Indexed keywords

AERODYNAMICS; BODY SIZE; BREEDING SEASON; FLIGHT; GEOGRAPHICAL VARIATION; LATITUDE; MATE CHOICE; MATING SUCCESS; ORNAMENTATION; PHENOTYPE; POPULATION DENSITY; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; SEXUAL SELECTION; SONGBIRD; TAIL FEATHER; WING MORPHOLOGY;

EUROPE;

AVES; HIRUNDO; HIRUNDO RUSTICA;

EID: 84857983272     PISSN: 00244066     EISSN: 10958312     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8312.2011.01830.x     Document Type: Article

References (80)

1. Ambrosini R, Møller AP, Saino N. 2009. A quantitative measure of migratory connectivity. Journal of Theoretical Biology 257: 203-211.
2. Andersson M. 1982. Female choice selects for extreme tail length in a widowbird. Nature 299: 818-820.
3. Aparicio JM, Bonal R, Cordero PJ. 2003. The evolution of the structure of tail feathers: implications on the theory of sexual selection. Evolution 57: 397-405.
4. Aparicio JM, Møller AP. 2012. Artefactual effects of tail manipulation on fitness. Animal Behaviour 83. In press.
5. Backwell PRY, Christy JH, Telford SR, Jennions MD, Passmore NI. 2000. Dishonest signalling in a fiddler crab. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 267: 719-724.
6. Balbontín J, Møller AP, Hermosell IG, Marzal A, Reviriego M, de Lope F. 2009. Individual responses in spring arrival date to ecological conditions during winter and migration in a migratory bird. Journal of Animal Ecology 78: 981-989.
7. Barbosa A, Møller AP. 1999. Sexual selection and tail streamers in the barn swallow: appropriate tests of the function of size-dimorphic long tails. Behavioral Ecology 10: 112-114.
8. Brinkhof MWG, Cave AJ, Perdeck AC. 1997. The seasonal decline in the first-year survival of juvenile coots: an experimental approach. Journal of Animal Ecology 66: 73-82.
9. Bro-Jørgensen J, Johnstone RA, Evans MR. 2007. Uninformative exaggeration of male sexual ornaments in barn swallows. Current Biology 17: 850-855.
10. Buchanan KL, Evans MR. 2000. Selection for tail streamers in the barn swallow. Behavioral Ecology 11: 228-238.
11. Candolin U. 1999. The relationship between signal quality and physical condition: is sexual signalling honest in the three-spined stickleback? Animal Behaviour 58: 1261-1267.
12. Candolin U, Salesto T, Evers M. 2007. Changed environmental conditions weaken sexual selection in sticklebacks. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 20: 233-239.
13. Cuervo JJ. 2000. Foraging cost of ornaments which are not ornaments: comment on Matyjasiak etal. (1999). Ethology 106: 659-663.
14. Cuervo JJ, de Lope F, Møller AP. 1996. The function of long tails in female barn swallows (Hirundo rustica): an experimental study. Behavioral Ecology 7: 132-136.
15. Cuervo JJ, de Lope F, Møller AP. 2003. Experimental manipulation of tail length in female barn swallows (Hirundo rustica) affects their future reproductive success. Behavioral Ecology 14: 451-456.
16. Dale J, Dunn PO, Figuerola J, Lislevand T, Székely T, Whittingham LA. 2007. Sexual selection explains Rensch's rule of allometry for sexual size dimorphism. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 274: 2971-2979.
17. Evans MR. 1998. Selection on swallow tail streamers. Nature 394: 233-234.
18. Evans MR, Thomas ALR. 1997. Testing the functional significance of tail streamers. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 264: 211-217.
19. Fairbairn DJ. 1997. Allometry for sexual size dimorphism: pattern and process in the coevolution of body size in males and females. Annual Reviews of Ecology & Systematic 28: 659-687.
20. Fisher RA. 1958. The genetic theory of natural selection, 2nd edn. Mineola, NY: Dover.
21. Fleming IA, Gross MR. 1990. Latitudinal clines: a trade-off between egg number and size in pacific salmon. Ecology 71: 1-11.
22. Getty T. 1998. Reliable signalling need not be a handicap. Animal Behaviour 56: 253-255.
23. Gordo O, Sanz JJ, Lobo JM. 2007. Environmental and geographical constraints on common swift and barn swallow spring arrival patterns throughout the Iberian Peninsula. Journal of Biogeography 34: 1065-1076.
24. Gosselin T, Sainte-Marie B, Bernatchez L. 2005. Geographic variation of multiple paternity in the American lobster, Homarus americanus. Molecular Ecology 14: 1517-1525.
25. Grafen A. 1990a. Sexual selection unhandicapped by the Fisher process. Journal of Theoretical Biology 144: 473-516.
26. Grafen A. 1990b. Biological signals as handicaps. Journal of Theoretical Biology 144: 517-546.
27. Hedenström A. 2002. Aerodynamics, evolution and ecology of avian flight. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 17: 415-422.
28. Hedenström A, Møller AP. 1999. Length of tail streamers in barn swallows. Nature 397: 115.
29. Hodgins KA, Barrett SCH. 2008. Geographic variation in floral morphology and style-morph ratios in a sexually polymorphic daffodil. American Journal of Botany 95: 185-195.
30. Imasheva AG, Bubli OA, Lazebny OE. 1994. Variation in wing length in Eurasian natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster. Heredity 72: 508-514.
31. Iverson JB, Balgooyen CP, Byrd KK, Lyddan KK. 1993. Latitudinal variation in egg and clutch size in turtles. Canadian Journal of Zoology 71: 2448-2461.
32. Iwasa Y, Pomiankowski A, Nee S. 1991. The evolution of costly mate preferences. II. The 'handicap' principle. Evolution 45: 1431-1442.
33. Kirkpatrick M. 1982. Sexual selection and the evolution of female choice. Evolution 36: 1-12.
34. Kokko H, Brooks R, McNamara JM, Houston AI. 2002. The sexual selection continuum. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 269: 1331-1340.
35. Lack D. 1948. The significance of clutch-size. III. Some interspecific comparisons. Ibis 90: 25-45.
36. Lande R. 1980. Sexual dimorphism, sexual selection, and adaptation in polygenic characters. Evolution 34: 292-305.
37. Lande R. 1981. Models of speciation by sexual selection on polygenic characters. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 78: 3721-3725.
38. Laugen AT, Laurila A, Räsänen K, Merilä J. 2003. Latitudinal countergradient variation in the common frog (Rana temporaria) development rates - evidence for local adaptation. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 16: 996-1005.
39. Lockwood R, Swaddle JP, Rayner JMV. 1998. Avian wingtip shape reconsidered: wingtip shape indices and morphological adaptations to migration. Journal of Avian Biology 29: 273-292.
40. Lord RD. 1960. Litter size and latitude in North American mammals. American Midland Naturalist 64: 488-499.
41. Matyjasiak P, Jabłoński PG, Olejniczak I, Boniecki P, Lee S-D. 1999. Foraging cost of a long tail ornament: an experiment with sand martin females. Ethology 105: 521-530.
42. Matyjasiak P, Matyjasiak J, de Lope F, Møller AP. 2004. Vane emargination of outer tail feathers improves flight manoeuvrability in streamerless hirundines, Hirundinidae. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 271: 1831-1838.
43. Maybury WJ, Rayner JMV. 2001. The avian tail reduces body parasite drag by controlling flow separation and vortex shedding. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 268: 1405-1410.
44. Maybury WJ, Rayner JMV, Couldrick LB. 2001. Lift generation by the avian tail. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 268: 1443-1448.
45. Møller AP. 1988. Female choice selects for male sexual tail ornaments in the monogamous swallow. Nature 332: 640-642.
46. Møller AP. 1989. Viability costs of male tail ornaments in a swallow. Nature 339: 132-135.
47. Møller AP. 1992. Sexual selection in the monogamous barn swallow (Hirundo rustica). II. Mechanisms of sexual selection. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 5: 603-624.
48. Møller AP. 1993. Sexual selection in the barn swallow Hirundo rustica. III. Female tail ornaments. Evolution 47: 417-431.
49. Møller AP. 1994. Sexual selection and the barn swallow. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
50. Møller AP. 1995. Sexual selection in the barn swallow (Hirundo rustica). V. Geographic variation in ornament size. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 8: 3-19.
51. Møller AP, Barbosa A, Cuervo JJ, de Lope F, Merino S, Saino N. 1998. Sexual selection and tail streamers in the barn swallow. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 265: 409-414.
52. Møller AP, Chabi Y, Cuervo JJ, de Lope F, Kilpimaa J, Kose M, Matyjasiak P, Pap PL, Saino N, Sakraoui R, Schifferli L, von Hirschheydt J. 2006. An analysis of continent-wide patterns of sexual selection in a passerine bird. Evolution 60: 856-868.
53. Møller AP, de Lope F, López Caballero JM. 1995. Foraging costs of a tail ornament: experimental evidence from two populations of barn swallows Hirundo rustica with different degrees of sexual size dimorphism. Behavioural Ecology & Sociobiology 37: 289-295.
54. Møller AP, de Lope F, Saino N. 2004. Parasitism, immunity and arrival date in a migratory bird. Ecology 85: 206-219.
55. Møller AP, Tegelström H. 1997. Extra-pair paternity and tail ornamentation in the barn swallow Hirundo rustica. Behavioural Ecology & Sociobiology 41: 353-360.
56. Moore JA. 1949. Geographic variation of adaptive characters in Rana pipiens Schreber. Evolution 3: 1-24.
57. Muñoz A, Aparicio JM, Bonal R. 2008. Male barn swallows use different resource allocation rules to produce ornamental tail feathers. Behavioral Ecology 19: 404-409.
58. Muñoz A, Aparicio JM, Bonal R. 2011. Male barn swallows use different signalling rules to produce ornamental tail feathers. Evolutionary Ecology 25: 1217-1230.
59. Norberg R. 1994. Swallow tail streamer is a mechanical device for self-deflection of tail leading edge, enhancing aerodynamic efficiency and flight manoeuvrability. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 257: 227-233.
60. Olsen BJ, Greenberg R, Liu IA, Felch JM, Walters JR. 2010. Interactions between sexual and natural selection on the evolution of a plumage badge. Evolutionary Ecology 24: 731-748.
61. Pearson D, Shine R, Williams A. 2002. Geographic variation in sexual size dimorphism within a single snake species (Morelia spilota, Pythonidae). Oecologia 131: 418-426.
62. Pérez-Tris J, Tellería JL. 2001. Age-related variation in wing shape of migratory and sedentary blackcaps Sylvia atricapilla. Journal of Avian Biology 32: 207-213.
63. Perrin WF, Mesnick SL. 2003. Sexual ecology of the spinner dolphin, Stenella longirostris: geographic variation in mating system. Marine Mammal Science 19: 462-483.
64. Perrins CM. 1970. The timing of birds' breeding seasons. Ibis 112: 242-255.
65. Pomiankowski A, Iwasa Y, Nee S. 1991. The evolution of costly mate preferences. I. Fisher and biased mutation. Evolution 45: 1422-1430.
66. Raihani G, Székely T, Serrano-Meneses MA, Pitra C, Goriup P. 2006. The influence of sexual selection and male agility on sexual size dimorphism in bustards (Otididae). Animal Behaviour 71: 833-838.
67. Ralls K, Harvey PH. 1985. Geographic variation in size and sexual dimorphism of North American weasels. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 25: 119-167.
68. Rensch B. 1950. Die Abhängigkeit der relativen Sexualdifferenz von der Körpergrösse. Bonner Zoologische Beitäge 1: 58-69.
69. Rowe LV, Buchanan KL, Evans MR. 2001. Testing the function of tail streamers: a product of natural and sexual selection? Behavioral Ecology 12: 157-163.
70. Saino N, Primmer CR, Ellegren H, Møller AP. 1997. An experimental study of paternity and tail ornamentation in the barn swallow (Hirundo rustica). Evolution 51: 562-570.
71. Santure A, Ewen JG, Sicard D, Møller AP. 2010. Population structure in the barn swallow, Hirundo rustica: a comparison between neutral DNA markers and quantitative traits. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 99: 306-314.
72. Shine R, Fitzgerald M. 1995. Variation in mating systems and sexual size dimorphism between populations of the Australian python Morelia spilota (Serpentes: Pythonidae). Oecologia 103: 490-498.
73. Svensson E. 1984. Identification guide to European passerines, 3rd edn. Stockholm: L. Svensson.
74. Svensson E. 1997. Natural selection on avian breeding time: causality, fecundity-dependent, and fecundity-independent selection. Evolution 51: 1276-1283.
75. Székely T, Freckleton RP, Reynolds JD. 2004. Sexual selection explains Rensch's rule of size dimorphism in shorebirds. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 101: 12224-12227.
76. Teplitsky C, Ghazal N, Balbontín J, de Lope F, Møller AP. 2011. Quantitative genetics of migration syndromes: a study of two barn swallow populations. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 24: 2025-2039.
77. Thomas ALR. 1993. On the aerodynamics of birds' tails. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 340: 361-380.
78. Winkler H, Leisler B. 1992. On the ecomorphology of migrants. Ibis 134 (Suppl. 1): 21-28.
79. Zahavi A. 1975. Mate selection-a selection for a handicap? Journal of Theoretical Biology 53: 205-214.
80. Zahavi A. 1977. The cost of honesty. Journal of Theoretical Biology 67: 603-605.