Skip to main content
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences logoLink to Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
. 2003 Feb 7;270(1512):259–264. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2002.2216

Long-term fitness consequences of female extra-pair matings in a socially monogamous passerine.

Tim Schmoll 1, Verena Dietrich 1, Wolfgang Winkel 1, Jörg T Epplen 1, Thomas Lubjuhn 1
PMCID: PMC1691239  PMID: 12614574

Abstract

Whether female birds choose extra-pair mating partners to obtain genetic fitness benefits is intensely debated. The most straightforward and crucial test of 'good genes' models of female extra-pair mating is the comparison of naturally 'cross-fostered' maternal half-siblings sharing the same rearing environment as any systematic differences in performance between the two categories of offspring phenotype can be attributed to differential paternal genetic contribution. We analysed local recruitment and first-year reproductive performance of maternal half-siblings in the coal tit (Parus ater), a passerine bird with high levels of extra-pair paternity. We provide a highly comprehensive measure of the long-term fitness consequences of female extra-pair matings based on a large sample of 736 within-pair offspring (WPO) and 368 extra-pair offspring (EPO) from 91 first and 55 second broods, from which 132 breeders recruited into the study population. In contrast to predictions derived from 'good genes' models, we found no differences in local recruitment and seven parameters of first-year reproductive performance when comparing WPO and EPO. These results question the universal validity of findings in other bird species supporting 'good genes' models, particularly as they are based on the best approximation to female fitness obtained so far.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (176.5 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Birkhead Timothy R., Pizzari Tommaso. Postcopulatory sexual selection. Nat Rev Genet. 2002 Apr;3(4):262–273. doi: 10.1038/nrg774. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Jennions M. D., Petrie M. Why do females mate multiply? A review of the genetic benefits. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2000 Feb;75(1):21–64. doi: 10.1017/s0006323199005423. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Johnsen A., Andersen V., Sunding C., Lifjeld J. T. Female bluethroats enhance offspring immunocompetence through extra-pair copulations. Nature. 2000 Jul 20;406(6793):296–299. doi: 10.1038/35018556. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Mousseau T. A., Roff D. A. Natural selection and the heritability of fitness components. Heredity (Edinb) 1987 Oct;59(Pt 2):181–197. doi: 10.1038/hdy.1987.113. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1997.0042. [DOI] [PMC free article] [Google Scholar]
  6. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1999.0660. [DOI] [PMC free article] [Google Scholar]
  7. Sheldon BC. Differential allocation: tests, mechanisms and implications. Trends Ecol Evol. 2000 Oct 1;15(10):397–402. doi: 10.1016/s0169-5347(00)01953-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society

RESOURCES