Relatedness, polyandry and extra-group paternity in the cooperatively-breeding white-browed scrubwren (Sericornis frontalis )

Abstract We used DNA fingerprinting to examine the genetic parentage and mating system of the cooperatively breeding white-browed scrubwren, Sericornis frontalis, in Canberra, Australia. Our analyses revealed a remarkable variety of mating tactics and social organization. Scrubwrens bred in pairs or multi-male groups that consisted of a female and two or more males. Females were always unrelated to the pair male or alpha (dominant) male. Among multi-male groups we found three different mating tactics. Firstly, when alpha and beta (subordinate) males were unrelated, they usually shared paternity in the brood. This resulted in both males gaining reproductive benefits directly. Secondly, when beta males were not related to the female but were related to the alpha males, beta males sired offspring in some broods. In this situation, beta males gained reproductive benefits both directly and potentially indirectly (through the related alpha male). Thirdly, when beta males were related to the female or both the female and alpha male, they remained on their natal territory and did not sire any offspring. Thus beta males gained only indirect reproductive benefits. Overall, when group members were related closely, the dominant male monopolized reproductive success, whereas when the members were not related closely the two males shared paternity equally. This positive association between monopolization of reproduction and relatedness is predicted by models of reproductive skew, but has not been reported previously within a single population of birds. Other cooperatively breeding birds with both closely related and unrelated helpers may show a similar variety of mating tactics. Finally, we found that extra-group paternity was more common in pairs (24% of young) than in multi-male groups (6%), and we discuss three possible reasons for this difference.

[1]  S. Creel,et al.  Subordinate reproduction in dwarf mongooses , 1994, Animal Behaviour.

[2]  T. Burke,et al.  DNA fingerprinting in birds , 1987, Nature.

[3]  P. Boag,et al.  Preservation of avian blood and tissue samples for DNA analyses , 1991 .

[4]  S. Emlen An evolutionary theory of the family. , 1995, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[5]  S. Creel,et al.  Inclusive fitness and reproductive strategies in dwarf mongooses , 1994 .

[6]  S. Pruett-Jones,et al.  Sex ratio and habitat limitation promote delayed dispersal in superb fairy-wrens , 1990, Nature.

[7]  C. Millar,et al.  Patterns of reproductive success determined by DNA fingerprinting in a communally breeding oceanic bird , 1994 .

[8]  R. Mulder,et al.  Helpers liberate female fairy-wrens from constraints on extra-pair mate choice , 1994, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[9]  P. Parker,et al.  Extra-pair paternity uncommon in the cooperatively breeding bicolored wren , 1996, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[10]  W. Piper,et al.  Polyandry and Incest Avoidance in the Cooperative Stripe-Backed Wren of Venezuela , 1993 .

[11]  R. Mulder,et al.  Fairy-wren helpers often care for young to which they are unrelated , 1995, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[12]  J. Ahlquist Phylogeny and classification of birds , 1985 .

[13]  M. W. Young,et al.  An unusual coding sequence from a Drosophila clock gene is conserved in vertebrates , 1985, Nature.

[14]  Sandra L. Vehrencamp,et al.  A model for the evolution of despotic versus egalitarian societies , 1983, Animal Behaviour.

[15]  L. Christidis,et al.  Genetic differentiation in the white-browed scrubwren (Sericornis frontalis) complex (Aves : Acanthizidae) , 1991 .

[16]  A. Jeffreys,et al.  Individual-specific ‘fingerprints’ of human DNA , 1985, Nature.

[17]  N. Davies,et al.  Limits to cooperative polyandry in birds , 1994, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[18]  R. Wiley,et al.  THE EVOLUTION OF COOPERATIVE BREEDING BY DELAYED RECIPROCITY AND QUEUING FOR FAVORABLE SOCIAL POSITIONS , 1984, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[19]  W. Piper,et al.  Use of fragment–sharing estimates from DNA fingerprinting to determine relatedness in a tropical wren , 1992 .

[20]  J. S. Quinn,et al.  Shared paternity among non-relatives is a result of an egalitarian mating system in a communally breeding bird, the pukeko , 1994, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[21]  D. Parkin,et al.  Demographic study of a wild house sparrow population by DNA fingerprinting , 1987, Nature.

[22]  T. Burke,et al.  Parental care and mating behaviour of polyandrous dunnocks Prunella modularis related to paternity by DNA fingerprinting , 1989, Nature.

[23]  Stephen T. Emlen,et al.  Cooperative breeding in birds and mammals. , 1984 .

[24]  H. Bell Co-operative breeding by the White-browed Scrub-wren Sericornis frontalis , 1983 .

[25]  A. Grafen Natural selection, kin selection and group selection [Polistes fuscatus, wasps] , 1984 .

[26]  L. Keller,et al.  Partitioning of reproduction in animal societies. , 1994, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[27]  P. Parker,et al.  Facultative dispersal by juvenile males in the cooperative stripe-backed wren , 1995 .

[28]  P. Ewald Breeding systems: helping and communal breeding in birds. , 1987, Science.

[29]  G. Szalay A Genetic Differentiation , 1973 .

[30]  C. Packer,et al.  A molecular genetic analysis of kinship and cooperation in African lions , 1991, Nature.

[31]  S. Zack,et al.  Shared paternity revealed by genetic analysis in cooperatively breeding tropical wrens , 1990, Nature.

[32]  S. J. Ambrose,et al.  The Social Organisation of the White-browed Scrubwren Sericornis frontalis Gould (Acanthizidae) in Arid, Semi-arid and Mesic Environments of Western Australia , 1989 .

[33]  Hilla Peretz,et al.  Ju n 20 03 Schrödinger ’ s Cat : The rules of engagement , 2003 .

[34]  N. Davies Dunnock Behaviour and Social Evolution , 1992 .

[35]  S. Haig,et al.  EXAMINATION OF POPULATION STRUCTURE IN RED‐COCKADED WOODPECKERS USING DNA PROFILES , 1993, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.