4.5 Article

Pairing patterns in relation to body size, genetic similarity and multilocus heterozygosity in a tropical monogamous bird species

Journal

BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY AND SOCIOBIOLOGY
Volume 68, Issue 10, Pages 1723-1731

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00265-014-1780-1

Keywords

Assortative mating; Mate choice; Heterozygosity; Wing chord; Zenaida aurita; Zenaida dove

Funding

  1. Agence Nationale pour la Recherche (ANR, Programme Blanc Monogamix)
  2. Conseil Regional de Bourgogne
  3. Ministere de l'Enseignement Superieur et de la Recherche

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The relative influence of genetic and phenotypic quality on pairing status and mating patterns in socially monogamous species remains poorly documented. We studied social status and pairing patterns in relation to genetic similarity and multilocus heterozygosity (MLH) estimates from 11 microsatellite markers, and both tarsus length and wing chord (as a measure of competitive ability in territorial defence) in a socially monogamous tropical bird species where individuals defend territories year-round, alone or in pairs, the Zenaida dove, Zenaida aurita. Tarsus length and wing chord did not differ between unpaired territorial birds and paired ones in either sex, whereas paired females, but not paired males, tended to be more heterozygous than unpaired ones. Among 84 pairs, we found no evidence for assortative mating for tarsus length, wing chord, MLH or genetic similarity. However, within pairs, male wing chord was positively related to female MLH and female tarsus length was positively related to male MLH, with no evidence for local effects, suggesting assortative mating by individual quality. Although the observed pattern of mating in Zenaida doves may be the product of mutual mate choice, further assessment of this hypothesis requires direct investigation of both mating preference in each sex and lifetime reproductive success in relation to body size and MLH.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available