Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-rg895 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-04T00:34:47.207Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

13 - Alternative reproductive tactics in birds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 August 2009

By
Oliver Krüger
Edited by
Rui F. Oliveira ,
Michael Taborsky  and
H. Jane Brockmann
Oliver Krüger
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology University of Cambridge Downing Street Cambridge CB2 3EJ United Kingdom
Rui F. Oliveira
Affiliation:
Instituto Superior Psicologia Aplicada, Lisbon
Michael Taborsky
Affiliation:
Universität Bern, Switzerland
H. Jane Brockmann
Affiliation:
University of Florida
Get access

Summary

CHAPTER SUMMARY

Birds, as one of the most-studied taxa among all organisms, have provided some of the best examples of alternative reproductive strategies and tactics. In this chapter, I first review the few cases where a genetic polymorphism has either been documented or is the most likely underlying cause for the alternative strategies observed. They range from the classic ruff example, where males either defend a territory as independents or try to obtain matings as nonterritorial satellites, to the different egg morphs described in the common cuckoo and plumage polymorphisms associated with different life-history strategies. In birds, commonly employed conditional strategies that increase fitness are intraspecific brood parasitism in females and extra-pair copulation behavior in males. Finally I discuss the interactions between the sexes, the influence these interactions have on strategies followed by one sex, and the importance of incorporating these interactions in future models. I also suggest reasons to explain why certain strategies, such as parasitic male reproductive behavior, are so rare in birds compared to other taxa.

INTRODUCTION

The evolution of alternative reproductive phenotypes is often believed to be associated with sexual selection (Neff 2001). Since the study of sexual selection and mate choice has figured prominently in ornithology over the last two decades (Andersson 1994), it comes as no surprise that a number of examples have been discovered in this taxon.

Gross's (1996) classification divides alternative reproductive phenotypes in birds into two groups.

Type
Chapter
Information
Alternative Reproductive Tactics
An Integrative Approach
 , pp. 343 - 355
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Åhlund, M. and Andersson, M. 2001. Female ducks can double their reproduction. Nature 414, 600–601.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alonzo, S. H. and Warner, R. R. 1999. A trade-off generated by sexual conflict: Mediterranean wrasse males refuse present mates to increase future success. Behavioral Ecology 10, 105–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alonzo, S. H. and Warner, R. R. 2000. Female choice, conflict between the sexes and the evolution of male alternative reproductive behaviours. Evolutionary Ecology Research 2, 149–170.Google Scholar
Andersson, M. 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Arnold, K. E. and Owens, I. P. F. 2002. Extra-pair paternity and egg dumping in birds: life history, parental care and the risk of retaliation. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 269, 1263–1269.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arnqvist, G. and Kirkpatrick, M. 2005. The evolution of infidelity in socially monogamous passerines: the strength of direct and indirect selection on extrapair copulation behavior in females. American Naturalist 165, S26–S37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bachman, G. and Widemo, F. 1999. Relationships between body composition, body size and alternative reproductive tactics in a lekking sandpiper, the ruff (Philomachus pugnax). Functional Ecology 13, 411–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Badyaev, A. V. and Hill, G. E. 2002. Paternal care as a conditional strategy: distinct reproductive tactics associated with elaboration of plumage ornamentation in the house finch. Behavioral Ecology 13, 591–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birkhead, T. R. and Møller, A. P. 1992. Sperm Competition in Birds: Evolutionary Causes and Consequences. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Birkhead, T. R. and Møller, A. P. 1993. Female control of paternity. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 8, 100–104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Briskie, J. V. 1998. Avian genitalia. Auk 115, 826–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brockmann, H. J. 2001. The evolution of alternative strategies and tactics. Advances in the Study of Behavior 30, 1–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooke, M. L., Davies, N. B., and Noble, D. G. 1998. Rapid decline of host defences in response to reduced cuckoo parasitism: behavioural flexibility of reed warblers in a changing world. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 265, 1277–1282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, C. R. and Brown, M. B. 1996. Coloniality in the Cliff Swallow: The Effect of Group Size on Social Behaviour. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Brown, C. R. and Brown, M. B. 1998. Fitness components associated with alternative reproductive tactics in cliff swallows. Behavioral Ecology 9, 158–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butchart, S. H. M., Kilner, R. M., Fuisz, T., and Davies, N. B. 2003. Differences in the nestling begging calls of hosts and host-races of the common cuckoo, Cuculus canorus. Animal Behaviour 65, 345–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clutton-Brock, T. H. 1991. The Evolution of Parental Care. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Davies, N. B. 1992. Dunnock Behaviour and Social Evolution. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Davies, N. B. 2000. Cuckoos, Cowbirds and Other Cheats. London: T. and A. D. Poyser.Google Scholar
Davies, N. B., Brooke, M. L., and Kacelnik, A. 1996. Recognition errors and probability of parasitism determine whether reed warblers should accept or reject mimetic cuckoo eggs. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 263, 925–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eadie, J. M. and Fryxell, J. M. 1992. Density dependence, frequency dependence, and alternative nesting strategies in goldeneyes. American Naturalist 140, 621–641.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eadie, J. M., Sherman, P., and Semel, B. 1998. Conspecific brood parasitism, population dynamics, and the conservation of cavity-nesting birds. In Caro, T. (ed.) Behavioural Ecology and Conservation Biology, pp. 306–340. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Formica, V. A., Gonser, R. A., Ramsay, S., and Tuttle, E. M. 2004. Spatial dynamics of alternative reproductive strategies: the role of neighbors. Ecology 85, 1125–1136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, H. L., Sorenson, M. D., Marchetti, K., et al. 2000. Genetic evidence for female host-specific races of the common cuckoo. Nature 407, 183–186.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greene, E., Lyon, B. E., Muehter, V. E., et al. 2000. Disruptive sexual selection for plumage coloration in a passerine bird. Nature 407, 1000–1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffith, S. C., Owens, I. P. F., and Thuman, K. A. 2002. Extrapair paternity in birds: a review of interspecific variation and adaptive function. Molecular Ecology 11, 2195–2212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, M. R. 1996. Alternative reproductive strategies and tactics: diversity within sexes. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 11, 92–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hogan-Warburg, A. J. 1966. Social behaviour of the ruff, Philomachus pugnax. Ardea 54, 108–229.Google Scholar
Hoglund, J., Montgomerie, R., and Widemo, F. 1993. Costs and consequences of variation in the size of ruff leks. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 32, 31–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houtman, A. M. and Falls, J. B. 1994. Negative assortative mating in the white-throated sparrow, Zonotrichia albicollis: the role of mate choice and intra-sexual competition. Animal Behaviour 48, 377–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hugie, D. M. and Lank, D. B. 1997. The resident's dilemma: a female-choice model for the evolution of alternative male reproductive strategies in lekking male ruffs (Philomachus pugnax). Behavioral Ecology 8, 218–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jukema, J. and Piersma, T. 2004. Kleine mannelijke Kemphanen met vrouwelijk broedkleed: bestaat er een derde voortplantingsstrategie de faar?Limosa 77, 1–10.Google Scholar
Knapton, R. W. and Falls, J. B. 1983. Differences in parental contribution among pair types in the polymorphic white-throated sparrow. Canadian Journal of Zoology 61, 1288–1292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kokko, H, 1998. Should advertising parental care be honest?Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 265, 1871–1878.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krüger, O. and Lindström, J. 2001. Lifetime reproductive success in common buzzard Buteo buteo: from individual variation to population demography. Oikos 93, 260–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krüger, O., Lindström, J., and Amos, W. 2001. Maladaptive mate choice maintained by heterozygote advantage. Evolution 55, 1207–1214.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lanctot, R. B., Scribner, K. T., Kempenaers, B., and Weatherhead, P. J. 1997. Lekking without a paradox in the buff-breasted sandpiper. American Naturalist 149, 1051–1070.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lank, D. B. 2002. Diverse processes maintain plumage polymorphisms in birds. Journal of Avian Biology 33, 327–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lank, D. B. and Smith, C. M. 1987. Conditional lekking in ruff (Philomachus pugnax). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 20, 137–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lank, D. B., Smith, C. M., Hanotte, O., Burke, T. A., and Cooke, F. 1995. Genetic polymorphism for alternative mating behaviour in lekking male ruff, Philomachus pugnax. Nature 378, 59–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lank, D. B., Smith, C. M., Hanotte, O., et al. 2002. High frequency of polyandry in a lek mating system. Behavioral Ecology 13, 209–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindström, J. 1999. Early development and fitness in birds and mammals. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 14, 243–248.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lyon, B. E. 1993. Brood parasitism as a flexible female reproductive tactic in American coots. Animal Behaviour 46, 911–928.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyon, B. E. 1998. Optimal clutch size and conspecific brood parasitism. Nature 392, 380–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyon, B. E. 2003. Ecological and social constraints on conspecific brood parasitism by nesting female American coots (Fulica americana). Journal of Animal Ecology 72, 47–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magrath, M. J. L. and Komdeur, J. 2003. Is male care compromised by additional mating opportunity?Trends in Ecology and Evolution 18, 424–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marchetti, K., Nakamura, H., and Gibbs, H. L. 1998. Host-race formation in the common cuckoo. Science 282, 471–472.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McRae, S. B. 1997. A rise in nest predation enhances the frequency of intraspecific brood parasitism in a moorhen population. Journal of Animal Ecology 66, 143–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McRae, S. B. 1998. Relative reproductive success of female moorhens using conditional strategies of brood parasitism and parental care. Behavioral Ecology 9, 93–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mulder, R. A., Ramiarison, R., and Emahalala, R. E. 2002. Ontogeny of male plumage dichromatism in Madagascar paradise flycatchers Terpsiphone mutata. Journal of Avian Biology 33, 342–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neff, B. D. 2001. Alternative reproductive tactics and sexual selection. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 16, 669–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Donald, P. 1983. The Arctic Skua: A Study of the Ecology and Evolution of a Seabird. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, G. A., Baker, R. R., and Smith, V. C. F. 1972. The origin and evolution of gamete dimorphism and the male–female phenomenon. Journal of Theoretical Biology 36, 529–553.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petrie, M. and Kempenaers, B. 1998. Extra-pair paternity in birds: explaining variation between species and populations. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 13, 52–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Phillips, R. A. and Furness, R. W. 1998. Polymorphism, mating preferences and sexual selection in the Arctic skua. Journal of Zoology (London) 245, 245–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piper, W. H. and Wiley, R. H. 1989. Distinguishing morphs of the white-throated sparrow in basic plumage. Journal of Field Ornithology 60, 73–83.Google Scholar
Qvarnström, A. 1999. Different reproductive tactics in male collared flycatchers signalled by size of secondary character. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 266, 2089–2093.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rhijn, J. G. 1991. The Ruff. London: T. and A. D. Poyser.Google Scholar
Sasvári, L. and Hegyi, Z. 2000. Mate fidelity, divorce and sex-related differences in productivity of colonial and solitary breeding tree sparrows. Ethology Ecology and Evolution 12, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinervo, B. and Lively, C. M. 1996. The rock–paper–scissors game and the evolution of alternative male strategies. Nature 380, 240–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slagsvold, T. and Sætre, G. P. 1991. Evolution of plumage color in male pied flycatchers (Ficedula hypoleuca): evidence for female mimicry. Evolution 45, 910–917.Google ScholarPubMed
Smith, T. B. 1987. Bill size polymorphism and intraspecific niche utilization in an African finch. Nature 329, 717–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, T. B. 1990. Comparative breeding biology of the two bill morphs of the black-bellied seedcracker. Auk 107, 153–160.Google Scholar
Sorenson, M. D. 1997. Effects of intra- and interspecific brood parasitism on a precocial host, the canvasback, Aythya valisineria. Behavioral Ecology 8, 153–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taborsky, M. 1994. Sneakers, satellites and helpers: parasitic and cooperative behavior in fish reproduction. Advances in the Study of Behavior 23, 1–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thorneycroft, H. B. 1975. A cytogenetic study of the white- throated sparrow, Zonotrichia albicollis (Gmelin). Evolution 29, 611–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thuman, K. E. 2003. Female reproductive strategies in the ruff (Philomachus pugnax). Ph.D. thesis, Uppsala University, Sweden.
Tuttle, E. M. 2003. Alternative reproductive strategies in the white-throated sparrow: behavioural and genetic evidence. Behavioral Ecology 14, 425–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watt, D. J., Ralph, C. J., and Atkinson, C. T. 1984. The role of plumage polymorphism in dominance relationships of the white-throated sparrow. Auk 101, 110–120.Google Scholar
Westneat, D. F. and Stewart, I. R. K. 2003. Extra-pair paternity in birds: causes, correlates, and conflict. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 34, 365–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Widemo, F. 1998. Alternative reproductive strategies in the ruff, Philomachus pugnax: a mixed ESS?Animal Behaviour 56, 329–336.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yom-Tov, Y. 2001. An updated list and some comments on the occurrence of intraspecific nest parasitism in birds. Ibis 143, 133–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×