IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v23y2012i1p11-17..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reproductive skew in an avian cooperative breeder: an empirical test for theoretical models

Author

Listed:
  • Xin Lu
  • Chen Wang
  • Bo Du

Abstract

Reproductive skew models predict how animal groups containing multiple males maintain stable through partitioning reproduction. However, these models have rarely been tested in vertebrates, especially birds where tests have been made for less than 10 of more than 800 species that regularly exhibit cooperative breeding behavior. In the ground tit Parus humilis, a cooperative group consists of primary pair members and secondary individuals that are mainly failed male breeders. A previous study showed that primary males of low quality and thus facing high cuckoldry risks preferred to accept relatives as secondary members and yielded paternity to them. After showing no probability for secondary males to leave the group and live solitarily, the current study revealed that paternity share by a secondary male was positively correlated with his relatedness to the primary male and group productivity but independent of his body mass ratio to the primary male as a measure of relative competitive ability. These results are consistent with restraint transactional models, which predict that when a subordinate can claim unsanctioned reproduction for itself even though the dominant controls membership, both relatedness and group productivity favor the dominant to tolerate increased reproduction share by the subordinate.

Suggested Citation

  • Xin Lu & Chen Wang & Bo Du, 2012. "Reproductive skew in an avian cooperative breeder: an empirical test for theoretical models," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 23(1), pages 11-17.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:23:y:2012:i:1:p:11-17.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arr143
    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:23:y:2012:i:1:p:11-17.. 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.