IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v34y2023i5p804-815..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Common cuckoos do not mimic the size and shape of host eggs

Author

Listed:
  • Derya Akkaynak
  • Mary Caswell Stoddard

Abstract

Often considered a textbook example of coevolution, common cuckoo (Cuculus canorus) eggs are among the best-studied eggs in the world. Female cuckoos belong to genetically distinct host-races, each laying a specific egg type. When host species evolved to reject cuckoo eggs from their nests, cuckoos evolved better egg color and pattern mimicry. In this study, we asked: have cuckoos also evolved eggs that are well matched to host eggs in size and shape, and is the match better for highly discriminating hosts? We used digital image analysis to quantify the sizes and shapes of ~1230 eggs laid by ten European host species and their respective cuckoo host-races. We found that there is some variation in egg size and shape among host species. By contrast, different cuckoo host-races lay eggs that are—on average—similar in size and shape. This generic “one size and shape fits all” cuckoo egg morph is a poor match to most host egg sizes but a good match to most host egg shapes. Overall, we showed that host discrimination behavior was not correlated with the degree of egg size or shape similarity. We concluded that cuckoo females have not evolved egg size or shape mimicry. Alternative explanations for egg shape similarity include biophysical constraints associated with egg formation and selection for incubation efficiency. Finally, to place our results in a broader context, we compared the egg shapes of the common cuckoo and its hosts to those of three Australian parasitic cuckoo species and their hosts.

Suggested Citation

  • Derya Akkaynak & Mary Caswell Stoddard, 2023. "Common cuckoos do not mimic the size and shape of host eggs," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 34(5), pages 804-815.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:34:y:2023:i:5:p:804-815.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arad044
    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:34:y:2023:i:5:p:804-815.. 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.