We investigated the effect of brood size on nestling growth and survival, parental survival, and future fecundity in tree swallows (Tachycineta bicolor) over a 4-year period (1987–1990) in an effort to understand whether reproductive trade-offs limit clutch size in birds. In addition to examining naturally varying brood sizes in a population on Kent Island, New Brunswick, Canada, we experimentally modified brood sizes, increasing or decreasing the reproductive burdens of females by two offspring. Unlike previous studies, broods of the same females were enlarged or reduced in up to 3 successive years in a search for evidence of cumulative costs of reproduction that might go undetected by a single brood manipulation. Neither observation nor experiment supported the existence of a trade-off between offspring quality and quantity, in contrast with the predictions of life-history theory. Nestling wing length, mass, and tarsus length were unrelated to brood size. Although differences between means were in the direction predicted, few differences were statistically significant, despite large sample sizes. Nestlings from small broods were no more likely to return as breeding adults than nestlings from large broods, but return rates of both groups were very low. Parental return rates were also independent of brood size, and there was no evidence of a negative effect of brood size on future fecundity (laying date, clutch size). Reproductive success, nestling size, and survival did not differ between treatments for females whose broods were manipulated in successive years. Within the range of brood sizes observed in this study, the life-history costs of feeding one or two additional nestlings in tree swallows appear to be slight and cannot explain observed clutch sizes. Costs not measured in this study, such as the production of eggs or postfledging parental care, may be more important in limiting clutch size in birds.
Not all traits are functional: the Panglossian paradigm
