Variance in mating success does not produce strong sexual selection in a polygynous songbird

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 24, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 1381-1389

  Sousa, Bridget F ^a   Westneat, David F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

Author keywords

Dickcissel; Extrapair fertilization; Mate choice; Opportunity for sexual selection; Selection gradient

Indexed keywords

AVIFAUNA; BROOD PARASITISM; FERTILIZATION (REPRODUCTION); MONOGAMY; ORNAMENTATION; PATERNITY; POLYGYNY; REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS; SEXUAL DIMORPHISM; SEXUAL SELECTION; SONGBIRD;

EID: 84886076593     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/art077     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Abramoff MD, Magelhaes PJ, Ram SJ. 2004. Image processing with Image J. Biophotonics Int. 11:36-42.
2. Alatalo RV, Carlson A, Lundberg A. 1988. The search cost in mate choice of the pied flycatcher. Anim Behav. 36:289-291.
3. Albrecht T, Schnitzer J, Kreisinger J, Exnerova A, Bryja J, Munclinger P. 2007. Extrapair paternity and the opportunity for sexual selection in long-distant migratory passerines. Behav Ecol. 18:477-486.
4. Anderson TR. 2006. Biology of the ubiquitous house sparrow: from genes to populations. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.
5. Andrew P. 1987. The costs of choice in sexual selection. J Theor Biol. 128:195-218.
6. Armenta JK, Dunn PO, Whittingham LA. 2008. Effects of specimen age on plumage color. Auk. 125:803-808.
7. Arnold SJ, Wade MJ. 1984. On the measurement of natural and sexual selection-theory. Evolution. 38:709-719.
8. Birkhead TR, Moller AP. 1992. Sperm competition in birds: evolutionary causes and consequences. London: Academic Press.
9. Candolin U. 2003. The use of multiple cues in mate choice. Biol Rev Camb Phil Soc. 78:575-595.
10. Carling MD, Brumfield RT. 2008. Integrating phylogenetic and population genetic analyses of multiple loci to test species divergence hypotheses in Passerina buntings. Genetics. 178:363-377.
11. Chaine AS, Lyon BE. 2008. Adaptive plasticity in female mate choice dampens sexual selection on male ornaments in the lark bunting. Science. 319:459-462.
12. Crow JF. 1958. Some possibilities for measuring selection intensities in man. Am Anthropol. 60:1-13.
13. Cuthill IC, Partridge JC, Bennett ATD, Church SC, Hart NS, Hunt S, Slater PJB, Rosenblatt JS, Snowdon CT, Roper TJ. 2000. Ultraviolet vision in birds. In: Slater PJB, Rosenblatt JS, Snowdon CT, Roper TJ, editors. Advances in the study of behavior. San Diego (CA): Academic Press. p. 159-214.
14. Darwin C. 1871. The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. London: Murray.
15. Delhey K, Johnsen A, Peters A, Andersson S, Kempenaers B. 2003. Paternity analysis reveals opposing selection pressures on crown coloration in the blue tit (Parus caeruleus). Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 270:2057-2063.
16. Dunn PO, Robertson RJ. 1993. Extra-pair paternity in polygynous tree swallows. Anim Behav. 45:231-239.
17. Forstmeier W, Leisler B. 2004. Repertoire size, sexual selection, and offspring viability in the great reed warbler: changing patterns in space and time. Behav Ecol. 15:555-563.
18. Freeman-Gallant CR, Wheelwright NT, Meiklejohn KE, States SL, Sollecito SV, Webster M. 2005. Little effect of extrapair paternity on the opportunity for sexual selection in savannah sparrows (Passerculus sandwichensis). Evolution. 59:422-430.
19. Gontard-Danek M-C, Moller AP. 1999. The strength of sexual selection: a meta-analysis of bird studies. Behav Ecol. 10:476-486.
20. Gowaty PA. 1985. Multiple parentage and apparent monogamy in birds. In: Gowaty PA, Mock DW, editors. Avian monogamy. Lawrence (KS): Allen Press Inc.
21. Hasselquist D, Sherman PW. 2001. Social mating systems and extrapair fertilizations in passerine birds. Behav Ecol. 12:457-466.
22. Hedrick AV, Temeles EJ. 1989. The evolution of sexual dimorphism in animals: hypotheses and tests. Trends Ecol Evol. 4:136-138.
23. Jacobs GH. 1981. Comparative color vision. New York: Academic Press.
24. Jones AG, Walker D, Kvarnemo C, Lindstrom K, Avise JC. 2001. How cuckoldry can decrease the opportunity for sexual selection: data and theory from a genetic parentage analysis of the sand goby, Pomatoschistus minutus. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 98:9151-9156.
25. Kalinowski ST, Taper ML, Marshall TC. 2007. Revising how the computer program cervus accommodates genotyping error increases success in paternity assignment. Mol Ecol. 16:1099-1106.
26. Krackow S, Tkadlec E. 2001. Analysis of brood sex ratios: implications of offspring clustering. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 50:293-301.
27. Lande R, Arnold SJ. 1983. The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution. 37:1210-1226.
28. Lawler RR. 2009. Monomorphism, male-male competition, and mechanisms of sexual dimorphism. J Hum Evol. 57:321-325.
29. Lessells CM, Boag PT. 1987. Unrepeatable repeatabilities: a common mistake. Auk. 104:116-121.
30. McNett GD, Marchetti K. 2005. Ultraviolet degradation in carotenoid patches: live versus museum specimens of wood warblers (Parulidae). Auk. 122:793-802.
31. Merila J, Sheldon BC, Kruuk LEB. 2001. Explaining stasis: microevolutionary studies in natural populations. Genetica. 112:199-222.
32. Moller AP, Birkhead TR. 1994. The evolution of plumage brightness in birds is related to extrapair paternity. Evolution. 48:1089-1100.
33. Montgomerie R. 2006. Analyzing colors. In: Hill GE, McGraw KJ, editors. Bird coloration: mechanisms and measurements. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press. p. 90-147.
34. Owens IPF, Hartley IR. 1998. Sexual dimorphism in birds: why are there so many different forms of dimorphism? Proc Biol Sci. 265:397-407.
35. Payne RB. 1984. Sexual selection, lek and arena behavior, and sexual size dimorphism in birds. Lawrence (KS): Allen Press Inc.
36. Pedersen MC, Dunn PO, Whittingham LA. 2006. Extraterritorial forays are related to a male ornamental trait in the common yellowthroat. Anim Behav. 72:479-486.
37. Poirier NE, Whittingham LA, Dunn PO. 2004. Males achieve greater reproductive success through multiple broods than through extrapair mating in house wrens. Anim Behav. 67:1109-1116.
38. Pyle P. 1997. Dickcissel. In: Identification guide to North American birds. Part I. Bolinas (CA): Slate Creek Press. p. 623-624.
39. Real L. 1990. Search theory and mate choice. I. Models of single-sex discrimination. Am Nat. 136:376-405.
40. Reudink MW, Marra PP, Kyser TK, Boag PT, Langin KM, Ratcliffe LM. 2009. Non-breeding season events influence sexual selection in a longdistance migratory bird. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. 276:1619-1626.
41. Rivers JW, Jensen WE, Kosciuch KL, Rothstein SI. 2010. Community-level patterns of host use by the brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater), a generalist brood parasite. Auk. 127:263-273.
42. Say L, Pontier D, Natoli E. 2001. Influence of oestrus synchronization on male reproductive success in the domestic cat (Felis catus L.). Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 268:1049-1053.
43. Schartz RL, Zimmerman JL. 1971. The time and energy budget of the male dickcissel (Spiza americana). Condor. 73:65-76.
44. Schlicht E, Kempenaers B. 2011. Extra-pair paternity and sexual selection. In: Inoue-Murayama M, Kawamura S, Weiss A, editors. From genes to animal behavior: social structures, personalities, communication by color. Tokyo (Japan): Springer. p. 35-65.
45. Scott DK, Clutton-Brock TH. 1990. Mating systems, parasites and plumage dimorphism in waterfowl. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 26:261-273.
46. Slagsvold T, Lifjeld JT. 1997. Incomplete female knowledge of male quality may explain variation in extra-pair paternity in birds. Behaviour. 134:353-371.
47. Sousa B, Westneat DF. 2013. Positive association between social and extrapair mating in a polygynous songbird, the dickcissel (Spiza americana). Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 67:243-255.
48. Tamplin JW, Demastes JW, Remsen JV. 1993. Biochemical and morphometric relationships among some members of the Cardinalinae. Wilson Bull. 105:93-113.
49. Temple SA. 2002. Dickcissel (Spiza americana). In: Poole A, Gill F, editors. The birds of North America. Philadelphia (PA): The birds of North America, Inc.
50. Twiss SD, Thomas C, Poland V, Graves JA, Pomeroy P. 2007. The impact of climatic variation on the opportunity for sexual selection. Biol Lett. 3:12-15.
51. Vedder O, Komdeur J, van der Velde M, Schut E, Magrath M. 2011. Polygyny and extra-pair paternity enhance the opportunity for sexual selection in blue tits. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 65:741-752.
52. Wade MJ. 1979. Sexual selection and variance in reproductive success. Am Nat. 114:742-747.
53. Weatherhead PJ, Boag PT. 1995. Pair and extra-pair mating success relative to male quality in red-winged blackbirds. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 37:81-91.
54. Webster MS. 1992. Sexual dimorphism, mating system and body size in New World blackbirds (Icterinae). Evolution. 46:1621-1641.
55. Webster MS, Pruett-Jones S, Westneat DF, Arnold SJ. 1995. Measuring the effects of pairing success, extra-pair copulations and mate quality on the opportunity for sexual selection. Evolution. 49:1147-1157.
56. Westneat DF. 2006. No evidence of current sexual selection on sexually dimorphic traits in a bird with high variance in mating success. Am Nat. 167:E171-E189.
57. Yezerinac SM, Weatherhead PJ, Boag PT. 1995. Extra-pair paternity and the opportunity for sexual selection in a socially monogamous bird (Dendroica petechia). Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 37:179-188.
58. Zimmerman JL. 1984. Nest predation and its relationship to habitat and nest density in dickcissels. Condor. 86:68-72.