IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v13y2002i6p786-790.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Kin clustering in barnacle geese: familiarity or phenotype matching?

Author

Listed:
  • Henk P. van der Jeugd
  • Ineke T. van der Veen
  • Kjell Larsson

Abstract

We investigated the settling pattern of barnacle geese Branta leucopsis that returned to breed in their natal colony. Females nested close to their parents and sisters, but settling of males conformed to a random pattern. The apparent preference for breeding close to kin in females could be a by-product of extreme philopatry to the natal nest site. However, sisters also nested close to each other when settling on a different island than the one where their parents bred, pointing at a genuine preference for breeding close to kin. Females only nested close to sisters born in the same year (i.e., sisters that they had been in close contact with). This suggests that the clustering of female kin in barnacle geese does not result from phenotype matching. We did not detect any direct benefits of settling close to birth site or kin, but the analyses lacked power to detect small benefits of proximity to kin given the many other factors that may influence breeding success. Colonially breeding birds share characteristics that are generally believed to promote the evolution of cooperation, yet kin clustering and kin selection have been little studied in this group. Future research should be directed to studying the possible roles of kin clustering and kin selection in the evolution of coloniality. Copyright 2002.

Suggested Citation

  • Henk P. van der Jeugd & Ineke T. van der Veen & Kjell Larsson, 2002. "Kin clustering in barnacle geese: familiarity or phenotype matching?," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 13(6), pages 786-790, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:13:y:2002:i:6:p:786-790
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:13:y:2002:i:6:p:786-790. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.