A fixed agreement-consequences of brood size manipulation on alternation in blue tits.

Clicks: 295
ID: 50752
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #71 of 189 articles by views in PeerJ

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 189 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Recent studies have proposed that conditional cooperation may resolve sexual conflict over the amount of care provided by each parent. Such conditional cooperation may allow parents to equalize their investment by alternating their provisioning visits. This alternated pattern of male and female visits, that is, alternation, is thought to stimulate each other's investment leading to higher levels of provisioning and potential benefits for offspring development. However, experimental studies testing the role of alternation as an adaptive parental strategy to negotiate the level of investment are still absent. Therefore, we manipulated blue tit () parents by temporarily changing their brood sizes to induce changes in demand and thus visit rates. Parents were expected to visit more-assuming that prey sizes were constant-and alternate at higher levels when confronted with an enlarged brood given the greater potential for sexual conflict. In contrast, in reduced broods visit rates and alternation may become lower due to the smaller investment that is needed for reduced broods. We show that the level of alternation did not differ in response to the manipulated brood sizes, despite a directional change in visit rates for enlarged and reduced broods as expected. Nestlings did not benefit from high levels of alternation as no effects on nestling mass gain were present in either of the different manipulations. These findings indicate that alternation does not serve as a mechanism to motivate each other to feed at higher rates. Parents hence appeared to be inflexible in their level of alternation. We therefore suggest that the level of alternation might reflect a fixed agreement about the relative investment by each of the caring parents.
Reference Key
griffioen2019apeerj Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Griffioen, Maaike;Müller, Wendt;Iserbyt, Arne;
Journal PeerJ
Year 2019
DOI
10.7717/peerj.6826
URL
Keywords
parental investment alternation blue tits brood size manipulation conditional cooperation sexual conflict

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.