| Literature DB >> 24834103 |
Peter Samas1, Mark E Hauber2, Phillip Cassey3, Tomas Grim1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Why have birds evolved the ability to reject eggs? Typically, foreign egg discrimination is interpreted as evidence that interspecific brood parasitism (IP) has selected for the host's ability to recognize and eliminate foreign eggs. Fewer studies explore the alternative hypothesis that rejection of interspecific eggs is a by-product of host defenses, evolved against conspecific parasitism (CP). We performed a large scale study with replication across taxa (two congeneric Turdus thrushes), space (populations), time (breeding seasons), and treatments (three types of experimental eggs), using a consistent design of egg rejection experiments (n = 1057 nests; including controls), in areas with potential IP either present (Europe; native populations) or absent (New Zealand; introduced populations). These comparisons benefited from the known length of allopatry (one and a half centuries), with no gene flow between native and introduced populations, which is rarely available in host-parasite systems.Entities:
Keywords: Coevolution; Collateral damage; Discrimination; Heterospecific brood parasitism; Intraspecific brood parasitism; Species introductions
Year: 2014 PMID: 24834103 PMCID: PMC4022367 DOI: 10.1186/1742-9994-11-34
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Zool ISSN: 1742-9994 Impact factor: 3.172
Summary of contrasting predictions of conspecific parasitism (CP) and interspecific parasitism (IP) hypotheses and the results for the two focal host species in this study
| Conspecific egg rejection | + | – | + | + |
| CP rejection rate | CZ<NZ | n.a. | CZ<NZ | CZ<NZ |
| CP rejection latency | CZ>NZ | n.a. | CZ<NZ | CZ~NZ |
| IP rejection rate | n.a. | CZS>CZA>NZ | CZS<CZA>NZ | CZS~CZA~NZ |
| IP rejection latency | n.a. | CZS<CZA<NZ | CZS~CZA~NZ | CZS~CZA~NZ |
Populations of European blackbirds and song thrush, in the Czech Republic (CZ) are either sympatric (S) or micro-allopatric (A; as denoted by subscripts), populations in New Zealand (NZ) are all macro-allopatric with common cuckoos. CP predictions for Czech Republic vs. New Zealand populations are based on differences in the breeding densities of thrushes (higher in New Zealand for both species) and refer to host responses to conspecific eggs. IP predictions are based on sympatry vs. allopatry with cuckoos and refer to non-mimetic cuckoo-like model eggs. See Introduction for the rationale of predictions. n.a. = not applicable.
Figure 1Representative reflectance spectra (5 nm running means) of the eggs used in experiments. Examples (from left to right) depict song thrush and blackbird natural eggs and blue (redstart) and spotted (meadow pipit) model eggs.
Figure 2Host responses to experimental conspecific brood parasitism (CP) measured as (a) egg rejection and (b) latency to egg rejection. Responses to CP were compared between “CZ” (Czech Republic) and “NZ” (New Zealand) with low and high breeding densities, respectively; see hypotheses (ii) and (iii) in Introduction. Latencies to ejection (black) and to rejection (i.e., including desertion; grey) are presented as the raw data’s means ± SE. Sample sizes (nests) are given inside bars (a) or above x-axis (b).
Egg rejection response and latency to rejection by thrushes
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| Breeding density | 41 | 3.01 | 0.09 | |||
| Clutch | 101 | 1.43 | 0.24 | 39 | 0.79 | 0.38 |
| Nest stage | 98 | 1.00 | 0.40 | 35 | 0.67 | 0.57 |
| Laying date | 97 | 0.92 | 0.34 | 38 | 0.63 | 0.43 |
| | | | | | | |
| Breeding density | 48 | 2.94 | 0.09 | 11 | 1.22 | 0.29 |
| Clutch | 44 | 0.19 | 0.66 | |||
| Nest stage | 41 | 0.70 | 0.56 | 8 | 1.38 | 0.32 |
| Laying date | 47 | 0.64 | 0.43 | 7 | 0.05 | 0.82 |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| Geography | 216 | 0.59 | 0.55 | |||
| Egg model | ||||||
| G*E | 446 | 1.11 | 0.33 | 206 | 0.24 | 0.79 |
| Clutch | 449 | 0.40 | 0.53 | 208 | 0.70 | 0.40 |
| Nest stage | 213 | 2.31 | 0.08 | |||
| Laying date | 448 | 0.04 | 0.85 | 212 | 1.63 | 0.20 |
| | | | | | | |
| Geography | 308 | 0.16 | 0.86 | 101 | 2.53 | 0.08 |
| Egg model | 101 | 0.33 | 0.57 | |||
| G*E | 300 | 2.53 | 0.08 | 95 | 1.33 | 0.27 |
| Clutch | 303 | 0.29 | 0.59 | |||
| Nest stage | 98 | 1.97 | 0.12 | |||
| Laying date | 302 | 0.05 | 0.82 | 97 | 0.40 | 0.53 |
Response to conspecific egg in blackbirds includes nest desertion (i.e., abandoning the whole clutch), together with egg ejection (i.e., selective removal of a foreign egg), as rejection response to parasitism (see Results, and the Additional file 1: Appendices). All other responses (conspecific in song thrush, and interspecific in both thrushes) exclude desertion from analyses (for complete results, see Additional file 1: Appendix 2). Test statistics and P-values for non-significant terms are from backward elimination procedure just before the particular term (being the least significant) was removed from the model. Results of significant predictors from final models are in boldface. For effect sizes see Figures 2, 3 and Results. G = geography, E = egg model.
Figure 3Host responses to experimental interspecific brood parasitism (IP) with model cuckoo eggs measured as (a) egg rejection, and latency to egg rejection in (b) blackbirds and (c) song thrush. IP was simulated by adding a blue or a spotted egg model (Figure 1). Responses were compared between areas in sympatry (CZ-S), micro-allopatry (CZ-A) and macro-allopatry (NZ-A) with common cuckoos (“CZ” – Czech Republic, “NZ” – New Zealand); see hypotheses (iv) and (v) in Introduction. Blackbirds (b) and song thrush (c) latencies to ejection (black) and to rejection (i.e., including desertion; grey) are presented as the raw data’s means ± SE. Sample sizes (nests) are given inside bars (a) or above x-axis (b,c).