Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 16, Issue 1, pp 57–63 | Cite as

Reproductive defence priorities of male willow ptarmigan (Lagopus lagopus): enhancing mate survival or extending paternity options?

  • Kathy Martin
Article

Summary

Cock willow ptarmigan (Lagopus lagopus) closely guard their mates from predators and conspecific males, and vigorously defend their nests and young. In view of potential costs and benefits of behavioural guarding descisions, I designed a test to examine if, when and how males altered defence priorities. Cock willow ptarmigan were very attentive to their mates throughout the breeding season, unaccompanied hens comprising less than 3% of the sightings of mated females. From the second week of incubation until shortly after hatch, males attempted to guard both mates and offspring. Males guarded mates preferentially over nests until the third week of incubation; they then changed their priority to defence of offspring (nest and/or chicks). The overall defence response initially was strong, but decreased after the first week of incubation. Strength of response increased again in late incubation, and declined as chicks began to fly. Consistency of defence “decisions” was highest during prenesting and egg laying and lowest during late incubation. Since males defended their mates for a longer period than required for protection of paternity, hypotheses predicting enhanced mate survival and extended paternity options through renesting were examined. Removal of males did not result in reduced survival or increased weight loss of widows during incubation. In light of heavy nest depredation and displacement pressures by conspecifics, mate guarding throughout incubation enhanced male fitness by ensuring paternity in renesting attempts.

Keywords

Defend Defence Response Breeding Season Potential Cost Mate Survival 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allen HM, Stokkan KA, Stalsberg H (1978) Egg incubation by a willow grouse cock: observations on behaviour, plumage and brood patch histology. Astarte 11:1–5Google Scholar
  2. Andersson M, Wiklund CG, Rundgren H (1980) Parental defence of offspring: A model and an example. Anim Behav 28:536–542Google Scholar
  3. Beecher MD, Beecher IM (1979) Sociobiology of bank swallows: reproductive strategy of the male. Science 205:1282–1285Google Scholar
  4. Bergerud AT (1970) Population dynamics of the willow ptarmigan (Lagopus lagopus alleni L.) in Newfoundland 1955 to 1965. Oikos 21:299–325Google Scholar
  5. Birkhead TR (1979) Mate guarding in the magpie (Pica pica). Anim Behav 27:866–874Google Scholar
  6. Birkhead TR (1982) Timing and duration of mate guarding in magpies Pica pica. Anim Behav 30:277–283Google Scholar
  7. Bishop YMM, Fienberg SE, Holland PN (1975) Discrete multivariate analysis: theory and practise. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  8. Buitron D (1983) Extra-pair courtship in black-billed magpies. Anim Behav 31:211–220Google Scholar
  9. Butler RW (1982) Wing fluttering by mud-gathering cliff swallows: avoidance of “rape” attempts? Auk 99:758–761Google Scholar
  10. Dufty AM (1982) Response of brown-headed cowbirds to simulated conspecific intruders. Anim Behav 30:1043–1052Google Scholar
  11. Emlen ST, Oring LW (1977) Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of mating systems. Science 197:215–223Google Scholar
  12. Gowaty PA (1981) Aggression of breeding eastern bluebirds (Sialia sialis) toward their mates and models of intra- and interspecific intruders. Anim Behav 29:1013–1027Google Scholar
  13. Greig-Smith PW (1980) Parental investment in nest defence by stonechats (Saxicola torquata). Anim Behav 28:604–619Google Scholar
  14. Hannon SJ (1983) Spacing and breeding density of willow ptarmigan in response to an experimental alteration of sex ratio. J Anim Ecol 52:807–820Google Scholar
  15. Hannon SJ (1984) Factors limiting polygyny in the willow ptarmigan. Anim Behav 32:153–161Google Scholar
  16. Jeffries RL, Jensen A, Abraham KF (1979) Vegetational development and the effect of geese on vegetation at La Peŕouse Bay, Manitoba. Can J Bot 57:1439–1450Google Scholar
  17. Jenkins D, Watson A, Miller GR (1963) Population studies on red grouse (Lagopus lagopus scoticus Lath.) in north-east Scotland. J anim Ecol 32:317–376Google Scholar
  18. Lack D (1968) Ecological adaptations for breeding in birds. Metheun, LondonGoogle Scholar
  19. Lumpkin S (1983) Avoidance of cuckoldry in birds: the role of the female. Anim Behav 29:303–304Google Scholar
  20. Lumpkin S (1983) Female manipulation of male avoidance of cuckoldry behavior in the ring dove. In: Wasser SK (ed) Social behavior of female vertebrates. Academic Press, New York, pp 91–112Google Scholar
  21. Lumpkin S, Kessel K, Zenone PG, Erickson CJ (1982) Proximity between the sexes in ring doves: social bonds or surveillance? Anim Behav 30:506–513Google Scholar
  22. Mineau P, Cooke F (1979) Territoriality in snow geese or the protection of parenthood—Ryder's and Inglis's hypotheses re-assessed. Wildfowl 30:16–19Google Scholar
  23. Mumme RL, Koenig WD, Pitelka FA (1983) Mate guarding in the acorn woodpecker: within-group reproductive competition in a cooperative breeder. Anim Behav 31:1094–1106Google Scholar
  24. Mundahl JT (1982) Role specialization in the parental and territorial behavior of the killdeer. Wilson Bull 94:515–530Google Scholar
  25. Orians GH (1969) On the evolution of mating systems in birds and mammals. Am Nat 103:589–603Google Scholar
  26. Power HW (1980) Male escorting and protecting females at the nest cavity in mountain bluebirds. Wilson Bull 92:509–511Google Scholar
  27. Power HW, Doner CGP (1980) Experiments on cuckoldry in the mountain bluebird. Am Nat 116:689–704Google Scholar
  28. Power HW, Litovich E, Lombardo MP (1981) Male starlings delay incubation to avoid being cuckolded. Auk 98:386–389Google Scholar
  29. Robertson RJ, Norman RF (1977) The function and evolution of aggressive host behavior towards the brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater) Can J Zool 55:508–518Google Scholar
  30. Stroud DA (1982) Observations on the incubation and posthatching behaviour of the Greenland white-fronted goose. Wildfowl 33:63–72Google Scholar
  31. Trivers RL (1972) Parental investment and sexual selection. In: Campbell BG (ed) Sexual selection and the descent of man. Aldine, Chicago, pp 136–179Google Scholar
  32. Watson A, Jenkins D (1964) Notes on the behaviour of the red grouse. Brit Birds 57:137–170Google Scholar
  33. Weeden RB (1963) Management of ptarmigan in North America. J Wildl Manage 27:673–683Google Scholar
  34. Wittenberger JF, Tilson RL (1980) The evolution of monogamy: hypotheses and evidence. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 11:197–232Google Scholar
  35. Zwickel FC, Bendell JF (1967) A snare for capturing blue grouse. J Wildl Manage 31:202–204Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kathy Martin
    • 1
  1. 1.Biology DepartmentQueen's UniversityKingstonCanada

Personalised recommendations