IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v18y2007i2p287-291.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Kin selection does not explain male aggregation at leks of 4 manakin species

Author

Listed:
  • Bette A. Loiselle
  • Thomas B. Ryder
  • Renata Durães
  • Wendy Tori
  • John G. Blake
  • Patricia G. Parker

Abstract

In lek-mating systems, males aggregate at display arenas and females visit solely for the purpose of mating. This breeding system is characterized by high variance in male mating success with one male often receiving most copulations. High reproductive skew among males has led to question why males join leks when their chances of reproductive success are so low. Kin selection has been invoked as a mechanism to explain the evolution of lekking behavior, whereby nonreproducing but genetically related males gain indirect inclusive-fitness benefits. Evidence for kin selection among lek-mating birds is, however, mixed. Here, we show that kin selection is unlikely to be an important explanation for evolution of lekking behavior in manakins (Aves: Pipridae). We found that for 4 species chosen from several major clades within Pipridae, males within leks were not significantly more related than expected from random assortment of males in the population. This means that nonreproducing males do not gain indirect inclusive-fitness benefits by joining leks. This result suggests alternative mechanisms must be invoked to explain the evolution of lek-mating systems in manakins. Copyright 2007, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Bette A. Loiselle & Thomas B. Ryder & Renata Durães & Wendy Tori & John G. Blake & Patricia G. Parker, 2007. "Kin selection does not explain male aggregation at leks of 4 manakin species," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 18(2), pages 287-291.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:18:y:2007:i:2:p:287-291
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arl081
    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:18:y:2007:i:2:p:287-291. 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.