4.6 Article

Identifying the African Wintering Grounds of Hybrid Flycatchers Using a Multi-Isotope (δ2H, δ13C, δ15N) Assignment Approach

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 9, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0098075

关键词

-

资金

  1. Swedish Research Council Formas
  2. zoological foundation
  3. Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research [NWO-ALW 812.04.001, 851.30.003]
  4. NSERC-CREATE Training Program in Biodiversity Research
  5. Marie Curie fellowship and program [PEOPLE-2007-2-1-IEF]
  6. Environment Canada

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Migratory routes and wintering grounds can have important fitness consequences, which can lead to divergent selection on populations or taxa differing in their migratory itinerary. Collared (Ficedula albicollis) and pied (F. hypoleuca) flycatchers breeding in Europe and wintering in different sub-Saharan regions have distinct migratory routes on the eastern and western sides of the Sahara desert, respectively. In an earlier paper, we showed that hybrids of the two species did not incur reduced winter survival, which would be expected if their migration strategy had been a mix of the parent species' strategies potentially resulting in an intermediate route crossing the Sahara desert to different wintering grounds. Previously, we compared isotope ratios and found no significant difference in stable-nitrogen isotope ratios (delta N-15) in wintergrown feathers between the parental species and hybrids, but stable-carbon isotope ratios (delta C-13) in hybrids significantly clustered only with those of pied flycatchers. We followed up on these findings and additionally analyzed the same feathers for stable-hydrogen isotope ratios (delta H-2) and conducted spatially explicit multi-isotope assignment analyses. The assignment results overlapped with presumed wintering ranges of the two species, highlighting the efficacy of the method. In contrast to earlier findings, hybrids clustered with both parental species, though most strongly with pied flycatcher.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据