scholarly journals EXTRAPAIR PATERNITY AND SEXUAL SELECTION IN SOCIALLY MONOGAMOUS BIRDS: ARE TROPICAL BIRDS DIFFERENT?

The Auk ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 125 (4) ◽  
pp. 769-777 ◽  
Author(s):  
REGINA H. MACEDO ◽  
JORDAN KARUBIAN ◽  
MICHAEL S. WEBSTER
The Auk ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 121 (3) ◽  
pp. 788-795
Author(s):  
Bruce E. Byers ◽  
Herman L. Mays ◽  
Ian R. K. Stewart ◽  
David F. Westneat

Abstract A monogamous mating system that includes extrapair fertilization can potentially generate higher variability in male reproductive success than monogamy without extrapair fertilization. That increased variability could provide a correspondingly higher opportunity for sexual selection and, thus, for the origin and persistence of sexual dimorphism in monogamous species. To determine whether extrapair fertilization enhanced the opportunity for sexual selection in a sexually dimorphic, monogamous bird species, we used microsatellite DNA typing to assess the prevalence of extrapair fertilization and its effect on variation in male reproductive success in a population of Chestnut-sided Warblers (Dendroica pensylvanica). We found that the level of extrapair fertilization in our study population was at the upper end of the range reported for bird populations (47% of nestlings had extrapair fathers; 61% of broods contained extrapair offspring). We also discovered that almost all extrapair offspring were sired by paired males resident on nearby territories. In addition, we found that variation in male reproductive success was substantially higher than variation in female reproductive success, and that extrapair fertilizations made a significant contribution to variation in male reproductive success. Together, those findings suggest that extrapair fertilization creates an opportunity for sexual selection on male traits in this population.


2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 618-626 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily R A Cramer ◽  
Emma I Greig ◽  
Sara A Kaiser

Abstract Extrapair paternity should contribute to sexual selection by increasing the number of potential mates available to each individual. Potential copulation partners are, however, limited by their proximity. Spatial constraints may therefore reduce the impact of extrapair paternity on sexual selection. We tested the effect of spatial constraints on sexual selection by simulating extrapair copulations for 15 species of socially monogamous songbirds with varying rates of extrapair paternity. We compared four metrics of sexual selection between simulated populations without spatial constraints and populations where extrapair copulations were restricted to first- and second-order neighbors. Counter to predictions, sexual selection as measured by the Bateman gradient (the association between the number of copulation partners and offspring produced) increased under spatial constraints. In these conditions, repeated extrapair copulations between the same individuals led to more offspring per copulation partner. In contrast, spatial constraints did somewhat reduce sexual selection—as measured by the opportunity for selection, s’max, and the selection gradient on male quality—when the association between simulated male quality scores and copulation success (e.g., female preferences or male–male competition) was strong. Sexual selection remained strong overall in those populations even under spatial constraints. Spatial constraints did not substantially reduce sexual selection when the association between male quality and copulation success was moderate or weak. Thus, spatial constraints on extrapair copulations are insufficient to explain the absence of strong selection on male traits in many species.


2007 ◽  
Vol 18 (6) ◽  
pp. 985-993 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. C. Dolan ◽  
M. T. Murphy ◽  
L. J. Redmond ◽  
K. Sexton ◽  
D. Duffield

Evolution ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 620-621 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas A. Waite ◽  
Patricia G. Parker

Evolution ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 59 (2) ◽  
pp. 422 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corey R. Freeman-Gallant ◽  
Nathaniel T. Wheelwright ◽  
Katherine E. Meiklejohn ◽  
Sarah L. States ◽  
Suzanne V. Sollecito

2014 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 200-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah J. Wells ◽  
Weihong Ji ◽  
James Dale ◽  
Beatrix Jones ◽  
Dianne Gleeson

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document