IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v15y2004i2p205-209.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sex differences in embryo development periods and effects on avian hatching patterns

Author

Listed:
  • Mark I. Cook
  • Pat Monaghan

Abstract

Competitive interactions among siblings are an important determinant of parental fitness. These are strongly influenced by relative offspring size and therefore also by the extent to which parents can influence offspring size hierarchies. The temporal pattern of hatching in an avian clutch has a large effect on size and developmental disparities among chicks. Hatching spread is generally assumed to be mainly determined by the onset of incubation in relation to egg laying. However, the extent to which factors other than incubation onset, such as development rate, also influence timing of hatching has received little empirical investigation. We compared incubation periods of male and female black guillemot (Cepphus grylle) embryos to ascertain whether the time taken for an egg to hatch varies with embryo sex. Laying date and egg mass had no significant effect on incubation time, but male embryos hatched on average a day sooner than did females. The onset of incubation and hatching spread vary in black guillemots. However, in mixed-sexed clutches in which the first-laid embryo is male, a faster development time of males should mean asynchronous hatching regardless of parental incubation regime. This was supported by empirical investigation. These results demonstrate that factors other than incubation behavior can be important in establishing avian hatching patterns. Whether these sex differences in development rate are a result of constraints on the degree of parental control, or an adaptive strategy to manipulate hatching patterns, remains to be established. Copyright 2004.

Suggested Citation

  • Mark I. Cook & Pat Monaghan, 2004. "Sex differences in embryo development periods and effects on avian hatching patterns," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 15(2), pages 205-209, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:15:y:2004:i:2:p:205-209
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arg096
    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.

    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:15:y:2004:i:2:p:205-209. 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.