Male sexual attractiveness and parental effort in blue tits: a test of the differential allocation hypothesis

When the reproductive value of a breeding attempt is related to attributes of the breeding partner, an individual is expected to allocate more resources to parental care when mated to a high-quality partner. We tested predictions of the differential allocation hypothesis, by experimentally increasing and decreasing male blue tit, Parus caeruleus, sexual attractiveness and recording subsequent measures of male and female parental effort during the chick-feeding period. We used marker pens, to create two distinct male phenotypes: one more attractive phenotype with a shift in peak reflectance towards the ultraviolet (UV) part of the spectrum (UV+) and one less attractive phenotype with a shift towards the human-visible part of the spectrum (UV−). There was no significant difference in absolute or relative female feeding rate with respect to treatment. However, there were significant interaction effects between treatment and female age on female feeding rate, indicating that 1-year-old females provisioned more when mated to a UV+ male than a UV− male. UV− males fed their chicks at a higher rate than UV+ males, but there was no significant difference between the groups in total feeding rate. Females contributed less to nest defence relative to their mates when they were mated to UV− males, whereas the opposite was true for females mated to UV+ males. The behavioural responses did not translate into differences in measures of reproductive output. Our study suggests that male phenotypic appearance at the chick-feeding stage influences female decisions about level of parental effort.

[1]  B. Sheldon,et al.  Seasonal changes in a ultraviolet structural colour signal in blue tits, Parus caeruleus , 2002 .

[2]  J. Graves,et al.  Male attractiveness and differential testosterone investment in zebra finch eggs. , 1999, Science.

[3]  M. Petrie,et al.  Peahens lay more eggs for peacocks with larger trains , 1993, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[4]  T. Amundsen,et al.  Ultraviolet colour vision and ornamentation in bluethroats , 1997, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[5]  D. Hasselquist,et al.  The cost of an immune response: vaccination reduces parental effort , 2000 .

[6]  J. Nilsson Ectoparasitism in marsh tits: costs and functional explanations , 2003 .

[7]  R. J. Robertson,et al.  Confidence of Paternity and Male Parental Care , 1992, The American Naturalist.

[8]  A. Møller,et al.  Sperm competition in birds : evolutionary causes and consequences , 1992 .

[9]  N. Burley Sexual Selection for Aesthetic Traits in Species with Biparental Care , 1986, The American Naturalist.

[10]  B. Kempenaers,et al.  Studying paternity and paternal care: pitfalls and problems , 1997, Animal Behaviour.

[11]  S. Gangestad,et al.  Developmental stability and human violence , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[12]  B. Campbell Forces and Strategies in Evolution. (Book Reviews: Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man, 1871-1971) , 1972 .

[13]  W. Sutherland,et al.  The costs of reproduction in the collared flycatcher Ficedula albicollis , 1988, Nature.

[14]  Ian Newton Lifetime Reproduction in Birds , 1990 .

[15]  P. Sherman,et al.  Parentage and the evolution of parental behavior , 1993 .

[16]  F. Lope,et al.  FEMALE REPRODUCTIVE EFFORT DEPENDS ON THE DEGREE OF ORNAMENTATION OF THEIR MATES , 1993 .

[17]  R. Trivers Parental investment and sexual selection , 1972 .

[18]  J. Lifjeld,et al.  Ultraviolet plumage ornamentation affects social mate choice and sperm competition in bluethroats (Aves: Luscinia s. svecica): a field experiment , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[19]  J. Komdeur,et al.  Is male care compromised by additional mating opportunity , 2003 .

[20]  I. Cuthill,et al.  Plumage Reflectance and the Objective Assessment of Avian Sexual Dichromatism , 1999, The American Naturalist.

[21]  G. Sorci,et al.  Ultraviolet reflectance affects male-male interactions in the blue tit (Parus caeruleus ultramarinus) , 2004 .

[22]  A. C. Mateman,et al.  Female blue tits adjust parental effort to manipulated male UV attractiveness , 2004, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[23]  J. Viitala,et al.  Ultraviolet reflection and female mate choice in the pied flycatcher, Ficedula hypoleuca , 2002, Animal Behaviour.

[24]  B. Sheldon,et al.  Ultraviolet colour variation influences blue tit sex ratios , 1999, Nature.

[25]  Staffan Andersson,et al.  Ultraviolet sexual dimorphism and assortative mating in blue tits , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[26]  T. Pärt,et al.  Age and reproduction in birds - hypotheses and tests. , 1995, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[27]  C. Perrins,et al.  Birds of the Western Palearctic , 1978, Nature.

[28]  B. Kempenaers,et al.  Paternity analysis reveals opposing selection pressures on crown coloration in the blue tit (Parus caeruleus) , 2003, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[29]  R. A. Fisher,et al.  The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection , 1931 .

[30]  C. Darwin The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex: INDEX , 1871 .

[31]  B. Sheldon,et al.  Differential allocation: tests, mechanisms and implications. , 2000, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[32]  L. Sevensson Identification Guide to European Passerines , 1975 .

[33]  G. Williams Adaptation and Natural Selection. (Book Reviews: Adaptation and Natural Selection: A Critique of Some Current Evolutionary Thought) , 2018 .

[34]  R. Griffiths,et al.  A DNA test to sex most birds , 1998, Molecular ecology.

[35]  G. Hoelzer The good parent process of sexual selection , 1989, Animal Behaviour.

[36]  U. Gyllensten,et al.  Microsatellite Markers for Paternity Testing in the Willow Warbler Phylloscopus Trochilus: High Frequency of Extra‐Pair Young in an Island Population , 2004 .

[37]  I. Cuthill,et al.  Preferences for ultraviolet partners in the blue tit , 1999, Animal Behaviour.

[38]  J. Swaddle Reproductive success and symmetry in zebra finches , 1996, Animal Behaviour.

[39]  N. Burley The Differential-Allocation Hypothesis: An Experimental Test , 1988, The American Naturalist.

[40]  J. Figuerola,et al.  Brighter yellow blue tits make better parents , 2002, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[41]  A. Russell,et al.  Egg investment is influenced by male attractiveness in the mallard , 2000, Nature.

[42]  I. Cuthill,et al.  Blue tits are ultraviolet tits , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.