| Literature DB >> 26438064 |
J Q Ouyang1,2,3, Áz Lendvai4,5, R Dakin6, A D Domalik7, V J Fasanello8, B G Vassallo8, M F Haussmann8, I T Moore4, F Bonier4,7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Unpredictable and inclement weather is increasing in strength and frequency, challenging organisms to respond adaptively. One way in which animals respond to environmental challenges is through the secretion of glucocorticoid stress hormones. These hormones mobilize energy stores and suppress non-essential physiological and behavioral processes until the challenge passes. To investigate the effects of glucocorticoids on reproductive decisions, we experimentally increased corticosterone levels (the primary glucocorticoid in birds) in free-living female tree swallows, Tachycineta bicolor, during the chick-rearing stage. Due to an unprecedented cold and wet breeding season, 90 % of the nests in our study population failed, which created a unique opportunity to test how challenging environmental conditions interact with the physiological mechanisms underlying life-history trade-offs.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26438064 PMCID: PMC4595110 DOI: 10.1186/s12862-015-0497-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Evol Biol ISSN: 1471-2148 Impact factor: 3.260
Candidate model sets for A) the effect of weather and cort treatment, B) the effect of parental behavior and cort treatment, and C) the effect of weather, parental behavior, and cort treatment on tree swallow brood survival
| Model id | K | AICc | Effects in the model | ΔAICc | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A. | 1 | 4 | 160.93 | maxtemp + rh × treatment | 0.00 |
| 2 | 5 | 162.82 | (maxtemp + rh) × treatment | 1.89 | |
| 3 | 2 | 163.34 | maxtemp + treatment | 2.41 | |
| 4 | 3 | 165.34 | maxtemp + rh + treatment | 4.41 | |
| 5 | 2 | 165.86 | maxtemp + rh | 4.93 | |
| 6 | 4 | 166.40 | rh + maxtemp × treatment | 5.47 | |
| 7 | 2 | 167.93 | rh + treatment | 7.00 | |
| 8 | 1 | 168.33 | treatment | 7.40 | |
| 9 | 0 | 168.72 | null | 7.79 | |
| B. | 10 | 4 | 163.37 | ffv + mfv × treatment | 0.00 |
| 11 | 5 | 164.65 | (ffv + mfv) × treatment | 1.28 | |
| 12 | 4 | 167.30 | mfv + ffv × treatment | 3.93 | |
| 13 | 3 | 167.83 | mfv + ffv + treatment | 4.46 | |
| 14 | 2 | 169.63 | ffv + treatment | 6.27 | |
| 15 | 2 | 170.25 | mfv + treatment | 6.88 | |
| C. | 16 | 8 | 159.92 | maxtemp × mfv × treatment + ffv | 0.00 |
| 17 | 8 | 161.92 | rh × mfv × treatment + ffv | 2.00 |
K denotes the number of parameters in the model, AICc refers to the second order Akaike Information Criterion, ΔAICc shows the difference between the AICc value of a given model and the best-fit model in the set. Variable abbreviations: maxtemp daily maximum temperature, rh relative humidity, mfv/ffv male/female feeding rate (visits/h/chick)
Parameter estimates from time-dependent Cox proportional hazard models analyzing factors affecting daily chick mortality for the best-fit candidate models from Table 1. Treatment effects are given for control-implanted females relative to cort-implanted females
| Variable | coef | SE |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| A. Log rank test score = 14.33, df = 4, | |||
| Maximum daily temperature | −0.11 | 0.05 | 0.050 |
| Relative humidity | −0.03 | 0.02 | 0.187 |
| Treatment (control) | −7.42 | 2.92 | 0.011 |
| Relative humidity × treatment | 0.08 | 0.03 | 0.017 |
| B. Log rank test score = 13.51, df = 4, | |||
| Female feeding rate per chick | −0.80 | 0.32 | 0.014 |
| Male feeding rate per chick | 1.00 | 0.39 | 0.010 |
| Treatment (control) | 1.11 | 0.72 | 0.126 |
| Male feeding rate × treatment | −1.53 | 0.62 | 0.013 |
| C. Log rank test score = 25.38, df = 8, | |||
| Daily max. temperature | 0.17 | 0.12 | 0.163 |
| Male feeding rate | 5.62 | 2.24 | 0.012 |
| Treatment (control) | 9.14 | 3.55 | 0.010 |
| Female feeding rate | −0.64 | 0.33 | 0.053 |
| Daily max. temperature × male feeding rate | −0.22 | 0.10 | 0.035 |
| Daily max. temperature × treatment | −0.40 | 0.18 | 0.023 |
| Male feeding rate × treatment | −7.59 | 2.96 | 0.010 |
| Daily max. temperature × male feeding rate × treatment | 0.03 | 0.15 | 0.043 |
Coef’ indicates the estimated coefficient and ‘SE standard error of that estimate in the model
Fig. 1Rapid, repeated drops in temperature (upward spikes in the dotted line) were accompanied by concomitant increases in mortality, especially in control broods. Predicted values (relative risk of nest failure, i.e., daily mortality relative to the mean) and corresponding standard errors from the best-supported Cox proportional hazard model (see Table 2a) are plotted against date. The grey bands represent the standard error of the predicted values for the risk of nest failure (left y-axis). The dotted blue line shows the daily maximum temperature (°C) and corresponds to the right y-axis. To facilitate interpretation, the scale on the right y-axis was reversed
Fig. 2When relative humidity is low, broods of cort-implanted females had higher risk of failure than control broods, but this difference disappears when relative humidity is high. Predicted values (relative risk of nest failure, i.e., daily mortality relative to the mean) from the best-supported Cox proportional hazard model (see Table 2a) are plotted in relation to relative humidity and the treatment. Solid and dashed lines represent cort and control groups, respectively, and the grey bands represent the standard error of the predicted values. A loess smoother was applied to the predicted values to facilitate interpretation. The non-linearity of the predictions is due to the effect of maximum temperature in the model
Fig. 3High male feeding rate prior to cort treatment combined with cold temperatures increases the risk of brood failure. Predicted values (relative risk of nest failure, i.e., daily mortality relative to the mean) from the best-supported Cox proportional hazard model (see Table 2c) with respect to pre-treatment male feeding rate and female cort manipulation. Solid and dashed lines represent cort and control groups, respectively, and the grey bands represent the standard error of the predicted values. For visualization purposes in this figure only, maximum daily temperatures <20 °C were considered a cold period and maximum daily temperatures ≥ 20 °C were considered normal; note that temperature was treated as a continuous variable in all statistical analyses (e.g., Table 2c)