Literature DB >> 20573618

Kin recognition and adjustment of reproductive effort in zebra finches.

Aneta Arct1, Joanna Rutkowska, Rafal Martyka, Szymon M Drobniak, Mariusz Cichon.   

Abstract

The differential allocation theory predicts that females should invest more in offspring produced with attractive partners, and a number of studies support this prediction in birds. Females have been shown to increase reproductive investment when mated to males showing elaborated sexual traits. However, mate attractiveness might also depend on the interaction between male and female genotypes. Accordingly, females should invest more in offspring sired by individuals that are genetically dissimilar or carry superior alleles. Here, we show in zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata) that pairs of unfamiliar genetic brothers and sisters are less likely to reproduce in comparison with randomly mated pairs. Among the brother-sister pairs, those that attempted to breed laid smaller clutches and of lower total clutch mass. Our results provide the first experimental evidence that females adjust their reproductive effort in response to the genetic similarity of their partners. Importantly, these results imply a female ability to assess relatedness of a social mate without prior association.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20573618      PMCID: PMC3001379          DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2010.0417

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biol Lett        ISSN: 1744-9561            Impact factor:   3.703


  9 in total

1.  Male attractiveness and differential testosterone investment in zebra finch eggs.

Authors:  D Gil; J Graves; N Hazon; A Wells
Journal:  Science       Date:  1999-10-01       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Cryptic female choice: frogs reduce clutch size when amplexed by undesired males.

Authors:  H U Reyer; G Frei; C Som
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  1999-10-22       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Differential allocation: tests, mechanisms and implications.

Authors: 
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2000-10-01       Impact factor: 17.712

4.  Genetic quality and sexual selection: an integrated framework for good genes and compatible genes.

Authors:  Bryan D Neff; Trevor E Pitcher
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 6.185

5.  When not to avoid inbreeding.

Authors:  Hanna Kokko; Indrek Ots
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 3.694

6.  Choosing mates: good genes versus genes that are a good fit.

Authors:  Herman L Mays; Geoffrey E Hill
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 17.712

7.  Genetic incompatibility drives sex allocation and maternal investment in a polymorphic finch.

Authors:  Sarah R Pryke; Simon C Griffith
Journal:  Science       Date:  2009-03-20       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  Egg investment is influenced by male attractiveness in the mallard.

Authors:  E J Cunningham; A F Russell
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2000-03-02       Impact factor: 49.962

9.  Genetic variation and differentiation in captive and wild zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata).

Authors:  Wolfgang Forstmeier; Gernot Segelbacher; Jakob C Mueller; Bart Kempenaers
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 6.185

  9 in total
  9 in total

1.  Age-dependent inbreeding risk and offspring fitness costs in female black grouse.

Authors:  Carl D Soulsbury; Rauno V Alatalo; Christophe Lebigre; Kaisa Rokka; Heli Siitari
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2011-06-01       Impact factor: 3.703

2.  Semiochemical compounds of preen secretion reflect genetic make-up in a seabird species.

Authors:  Sarah Leclaire; Thomas Merkling; Christine Raynaud; Hervé Mulard; Jean-Marie Bessière; Emeline Lhuillier; Scott A Hatch; Etienne Danchin
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2011-09-21       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Olfactory kin recognition in a songbird.

Authors:  E Tobias Krause; Oliver Krüger; Philip Kohlmeier; Barbara A Caspers
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2012-01-04       Impact factor: 3.703

4.  Differential allocation in a lekking bird: females lay larger eggs and are more likely to have male chicks when they mate with less related males.

Authors:  Rebecca J Sardell; Emily H DuVal
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2013-11-13       Impact factor: 5.349

5.  Meta-analytic evidence that animals rarely avoid inbreeding.

Authors:  Raïssa A de Boer; Regina Vega-Trejo; Alexander Kotrschal; John L Fitzpatrick
Journal:  Nat Ecol Evol       Date:  2021-05-03       Impact factor: 15.460

6.  The female perspective of mating in A. femoralis, a territorial frog with paternal care--a spatial and genetic analysis.

Authors:  Eva Ringler; Max Ringler; Robert Jehle; Walter Hödl
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-06-29       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Evidence for inbreeding depression in a species with limited opportunity for maternal effects.

Authors:  Regina Vega-Trejo; Megan L Head; Michael D Jennions
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2015-03-04       Impact factor: 2.912

8.  Local Heterozygosity Effects on Nestling Growth and Condition in the Great Cormorant.

Authors:  Piotr Minias; Katarzyna Wojczulanis-Jakubas; Robert Rutkowski; Krzysztof Kaczmarek
Journal:  Evol Biol       Date:  2015-07-22       Impact factor: 3.119

9.  Parental genetic similarity and offspring performance in blue tits in relation to brood size manipulation.

Authors:  Aneta Arct; Szymon M Drobniak; Samantha Mellinger; Lars Gustafsson; Mariusz Cichoń
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2019-09-03       Impact factor: 2.912

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.