| Literature DB >> 29876081 |
Kate E Plummer1,2, Stuart Bearhop1, David I Leech2, Dan E Chamberlain3, Jonathan D Blount1.
Abstract
Throughout the Western World, huge numbers of people regularly supply food for wild birds. However, evidence of negative impacts of winter feeding on future reproduction has highlighted a need to improve understanding of the underlying mechanisms shaping avian responses to supplementary food. Here, we test the possibility that carry-over effects are mediated via their impact on the phenotypes of breeding birds, either by influencing the phenotypic structure of populations through changes in winter survival and/or by more direct effects on the condition of breeding birds. Using a landscape-scale 3-year study of blue tits (Cyanistes caeruleus), we demonstrate the importance of nutritional composition of supplementary food in determining carry-over effect outcomes. We show that breeding populations which had access to vitamin E-rich foods during the previous winter were comprised of individuals with reduced feather carotenoid concentrations, indicative of lower pre-feeding phenotypic condition, compared to fat-fed and unfed populations. This suggests that supplementary feeding in winter can result in altered population phenotypic structure at the time of breeding, perhaps by enhancing survival and recruitment of lower quality individuals. However, supplementation of a fat-rich diet during winter was detrimental to the oxidative state of breeding birds, with these phenotypic differences ultimately found to impact upon reproductive success. Our findings demonstrate the complex nature by which supplementary feeding can influence wild bird populations.Entities:
Keywords: antioxidant; carotenoid‐based plumage; carry‐over effect; life history trade‐off; oxidative stress; urban
Year: 2018 PMID: 29876081 PMCID: PMC5980576 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.4048
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ecol Evol ISSN: 2045-7758 Impact factor: 2.912
Figure 1A timeline to illustrate the study's experimental design in relation to the blue tit annual cycle. A novel approach was used to measure the phenotypic condition of birds pre‐winter feeding by measuring condition‐dependent carotenoid concentrations in feathers collected from breeding birds. The experimental protocols were replicated over 3 years
Figure 2Total carotenoid concentrations in the feathers of breeding blue tits in relation to winter feeding treatment. Mean (±SE) values predicted from the GLMM minimum model are shown, plus significant post‐hoc pairwise comparisons
General linear mixed models to assess the condition of breeding birds in relation to winter feeding, pre‐feeding condition (feather total carotenoid concentration), and breeding effort. All significant terms within each minimum model are reported plus non‐significant main effects, following stepwise deletion. Estimates for plasma total carotenoid and α‐tocopherol concentrations are on a log scale. Significant terms in bold
| Fixed effect | Plasma MDA | Plasma α‐tocopherol | Plasma total carotenoids | Body mass | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| χ2 |
|
| χ2 |
|
| χ2 |
|
| χ2 |
|
| |
| Treatment |
|
|
| 2.52 | 2 | .284 | 2.64 | 2 | .267 | 3.71 | 2 | .157 |
| Sex | 0.94 | 1 | .332 | 0.40 | 1 | .528 |
|
|
| 2.55 | 1 | .110 |
| Age | 0.59 | 1 | .441 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Head‐bill length | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
|
|
|
| Feather carotenoids | 0.67 | 1 | .414 | 0.75 | 1 | .386 | 0.46 | .496 | 0.33 | 1 | .567 | |
| Reproductive effort | 0.09 | 1 | .762 | 0.00 | 1 | .957 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Year |
|
|
|
|
|
| 3.38 | 2 | .185 |
|
|
|
| Treatment × sex |
|
|
| – | – | – |
|
|
| – | – | – |
Figure 3The effect of winter feeding treatment on phenotypic condition of breeding male (filled) and female (open) blue tits, in the form of plasma concentrations of (a) malondialdehyde (MDA), (b) total carotenoid, (c) α‐tocopherol, and (d) body mass. Mean (±SE) values are predicted from the GLMM minimum model, with sex × treatment interaction reintroduced where not significant (c, d). Feeding treatment means are marked by a cross. Post‐hoc pairwise significance of sex differences within treatments is reported at the bottom of each panel, and differences in male values between treatments are reported at the top, where *p < .05; **p < .01, and ***p < .001
Figure 4The effect of individual variation in phenotypic condition on breeding performance. (a) Laying date in relation to feather total carotenoid concentration. (b) Fledging success in relation in plasma malondialdehyde (MDA) concentration. Data distribution has been illustrated by rounding MDA values to 1 μmol/L and fledging success to 0.05, then scaling point areas by bird frequencies with examples given in the legend. Lines and 95% confidence intervals (shaded gray) are predicted from the minimum models