Literature DB >> 33686142

Plasticity in timing of avian breeding in response to spring temperature differs between early and late nesting species.

David J Messmer1,2, Ray T Alisauskas3,4, Hannu Pöysä5, Pentti Runko6, Robert G Clark3,4.   

Abstract

Plasticity for breeding dates may influence population vulnerability to climate change via phenological mismatch between an organism's life cycle requirements and resource availability in occupied environments. Some life history traits may constrain plasticity, however there have been remarkably few comparisons of how closely-related species, differing in key traits, respond to common phenology gradients. We compared population- and individual-level plasticity in clutch initiation dates (CID) in response to spring temperature among five duck species with early- to late-season nesting life histories. Plasticity was strongest in females of the earliest breeding species (common goldeneye [Bucephala clangula], mallard [Anas platyrhynchos], and gadwall [Mareca strepera]), whereas late-nesting lesser scaup (Aythya affinis) and white-winged scoter (Melanitta fusca deglandi) did not respond. These results contrast with previous work in other bird families that suggested late-breeders are generally more flexible. Nevertheless, late-breeding species exhibited annual variation in mean CID, suggesting response to other environmental factors unrelated to spring temperature. Goldeneye and gadwall females varied in their strength of individual plasticity ('individual × environment' interactions) and goldeneye and scoter females showed evidence of interannual repeatability of CID. Fitness consequences of CID plasticity in response to spring phenology, including trophic mechanisms and population consequences, warrant investigation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33686142      PMCID: PMC7940653          DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-84160-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Rep        ISSN: 2045-2322            Impact factor:   4.379


  18 in total

1.  Adjustment to climate change is constrained by arrival date in a long-distance migrant bird.

Authors:  C Both; M E Visser
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2001-05-17       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 2.  Repeatability for Gaussian and non-Gaussian data: a practical guide for biologists.

Authors:  Shinichi Nakagawa; Holger Schielzeth
Journal:  Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc       Date:  2010-11

3.  Climate change and population declines in a long-distance migratory bird.

Authors:  Christiaan Both; Sandra Bouwhuis; C M Lessells; Marcel E Visser
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2006-05-04       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 4.  The evolutionary ecology of individual phenotypic plasticity in wild populations.

Authors:  D H Nussey; A J Wilson; J E Brommer
Journal:  J Evol Biol       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 2.411

5.  The phenology mismatch hypothesis: are declines of migrant birds linked to uneven global climate change?

Authors:  Tim Jones; Will Cresswell
Journal:  J Anim Ecol       Date:  2009-08-20       Impact factor: 5.091

6.  Reproductive consequences of climate variability in migratory birds: evidence for species-specific responses to spring phenology and cross-seasonal effects.

Authors:  Amelia J Raquel; James H Devries; David W Howerter; Robert G Clark
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2019-08-21       Impact factor: 3.225

7.  Spring temperature, clutch initiation date and duck nest success: a test of the mismatch hypothesis.

Authors:  Mark C Drever; Robert G Clark
Journal:  J Anim Ecol       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 5.091

8.  Selection on heritable phenotypic plasticity in a wild bird population.

Authors:  Daniel H Nussey; Erik Postma; Phillip Gienapp; Marcel E Visser
Journal:  Science       Date:  2005-10-14       Impact factor: 47.728

9.  Adaptive phenotypic plasticity in response to climate change in a wild bird population.

Authors:  Anne Charmantier; Robin H McCleery; Lionel R Cole; Chris Perrins; Loeske E B Kruuk; Ben C Sheldon
Journal:  Science       Date:  2008-05-09       Impact factor: 47.728

10.  Adaptive responses of animals to climate change are most likely insufficient.

Authors:  Viktoriia Radchuk; Thomas Reed; Céline Teplitsky; Martijn van de Pol; Anne Charmantier; Christopher Hassall; Peter Adamík; Frank Adriaensen; Markus P Ahola; Peter Arcese; Jesús Miguel Avilés; Javier Balbontin; Karl S Berg; Antoni Borras; Sarah Burthe; Jean Clobert; Nina Dehnhard; Florentino de Lope; André A Dhondt; Niels J Dingemanse; Hideyuki Doi; Tapio Eeva; Joerns Fickel; Iolanda Filella; Frode Fossøy; Anne E Goodenough; Stephen J G Hall; Bengt Hansson; Michael Harris; Dennis Hasselquist; Thomas Hickler; Jasmin Joshi; Heather Kharouba; Juan Gabriel Martínez; Jean-Baptiste Mihoub; James A Mills; Mercedes Molina-Morales; Arne Moksnes; Arpat Ozgul; Deseada Parejo; Philippe Pilard; Maud Poisbleau; Francois Rousset; Mark-Oliver Rödel; David Scott; Juan Carlos Senar; Constanti Stefanescu; Bård G Stokke; Tamotsu Kusano; Maja Tarka; Corey E Tarwater; Kirsten Thonicke; Jack Thorley; Andreas Wilting; Piotr Tryjanowski; Juha Merilä; Ben C Sheldon; Anders Pape Møller; Erik Matthysen; Fredric Janzen; F Stephen Dobson; Marcel E Visser; Steven R Beissinger; Alexandre Courtiol; Stephanie Kramer-Schadt
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2019-07-23       Impact factor: 14.919

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.