Reversed sexual size dimorphism and parental care in the Red-footed Booby Sula sula

Ibis ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 147 (2) ◽  
pp. 307-315 ◽  
Author(s):  
HERVE LORMEE ◽  
CHRISTOPHE BARBRAUD ◽  
OLIVIER CHASTEL
Behaviour ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 132 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 479-496 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hugh Drummond ◽  
Maria Guerra

AbstractReversed sexual size dimorphism in avian species (females larger than males) may be an adaptive consequence of different roles of males and females in parental care. We examined the alleged division of labour in two-chick broods of the blue-footed booby, using behavioural observation and frequent weighing of chicks. In the first week of parental care, males and females fed broods at similar frequencies and provided similar masses of food, but females brooded more than males when broods were 5-10 d old. Subsequently, females provided a greater mass of food and frequency of feeds than males until chicks were at least 35 d old (mass) and 60 d old (frequency), while attending the brood for just as much time as males until chicks were at least 35 d old. Males and females did not differ in the tendency to feed (frequency and mass) the first-hatched chick differentially. In nearly all components of parental care examined here, and in other studies, the female's contribution is equal to or greater than the male's. Only in clutch attendance and nest defence does the male contribute more than the female, but his small size seems unlikely to enhance performance in these activities. Overall, small size appears potentially to limit male provisioning of the brood, and is unlikely to be an adaptation for division oflabour in parental care. This result casts doubt on the relevance of the division-of-labour hypothesis for adult size dimorphism.


2020 ◽  
Vol 129 (3) ◽  
pp. 532-542
Author(s):  
Jonny Schoenjahn ◽  
Chris R Pavey ◽  
Gimme H Walter

Abstract The causes of the reversed sexual size dimorphism (RSD; females larger than males) in birds of prey are subject to a centuries-old, passionate debate. A crucial difficulty is to distinguish whether the postulated benefits derive from the proposed causal process(es) or are incidental. After reviewing the existing literature, we present a methodology that overcomes this difficulty and renders unnecessary any speculative a priori distinctions between evolved function and incidental effects. We can thus justify the following novel version of the well-known nest defence hypothesis as the most likely to explain the phenomenon in all birds of prey that show RSD: if the female predominates in actively defending the eggs and young against predators, then she is the heavier sex, and her relatively greater body mass is adaptive. That is, heavier females are favoured (independently of males) by natural selection. The attractiveness of this hypothesis is that it has the potential to explain the phenomenon in all raptors exhibiting RSD, can deal with the exceptional cases in this group, explains the direction of the dimorphism, focuses on a key factor in the reproductive success of most raptors, is parsimonious, i.e. does not require supporting hypotheses, and is supported by a substantial body of evidence.


2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 363-368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Onolragchaa Ganbold ◽  
Richard P. Reading ◽  
Ganchimeg J. Wingard ◽  
Woon Kee Paek ◽  
Purevsuren Tsolmonjav ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (10) ◽  
pp. e01745 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorenzo Pérez-Camacho ◽  
Sara Martínez-Hesterkamp ◽  
Salvador Rebollo ◽  
Gonzalo García-Salgado ◽  
Ignacio Morales-Castilla

2011 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 155-161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mónica Sandra IGLESIAS ◽  
Francisco Antonio CRESPO ◽  
Alejandra del Carmen VALVERDE

The Auk ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 116 (1) ◽  
pp. 158-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paulo Catry ◽  
Richard A. Phillips ◽  
Robert W. Furness

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document