, Volume 71, Issue 4, pp 518–524 | Cite as

Natal philopatry and recruitment of willow ptarmigan in north central and northwestern Canada

  • K. Martin
  • S. J. Hannon
Original Papers


Natal philopatry and recruitment were measured in two populations of willow ptarmigan; one near Churchill, Manitoba and the other in northwestern British Columbia. We examined the return of tagged offspring in subsequent years with respect to geographical area, annual variation, their age when tagged, their sex, their body weight, age and number of their parents, and time of hatch (first nest or renest). Most chicks were tagged before they fledged, but chicks tagged after that had the highest rate of return. We also observed a strong positive relationship between fledging success of broods and offspring return in following years.

Patterns of offspring return were similar in both populations except that male offspring in Manitoba settled closer to their natal sites than those in British Columbia and more yearling captured in Manitoba had been tagged as chicks. Return of offspring did not vary with year, their body weights shortly after hatch, or with the age or number of parents raising them. However, a significantly higher proportion of offspring hatched from first nests (first-initiated clutches) returned compared to those hatched from renests (replacement clutches). The low return of chicks hatched from renests may due to low survival, low philopatry, or both. We observed no differences in the mating status (recruitment) of returning offspring with respect to the time they hatched or the number of parents that raised them.

Key words

Philopatry Recruitment Willow ptarmigan Hatch date 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bergerud AT, Peters SS, McGrath R (1963) Determining the sex and age of willow ptarmigan in Newfoundland. J Wildl Manage 27:700–711Google Scholar
  2. Bishop YMM, Fienberg SE, Holland PN (1975) Discrete multivariate analysis: theory and practice. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. Choate TS (1963) Habitat and population dynamics of white-tailed ptarmigan in Montana. J Wildl Manage 27:684–699Google Scholar
  4. Colgan PW, Smith JT (1978) Multidimensional contingency table analysis. In: Colgan PW (ed) Quantitative Ethology, John Wiley & Sons, New York, pp 145–174Google Scholar
  5. Cooke F, Findlay CS, Rockwell RF (1984) Recruitment and the timing of reproduction in lesser snow geese (Chen caerulescens caerulescens). Auk 101:451–458Google Scholar
  6. Dhondt AA (1979) Summer dispersal and survival of juvenile great tits in southern Sweden. Oecologia (Berlin) 42:139–157Google Scholar
  7. Dunn PO, Braun CE (1985) Natal dispersal and lek fidelity of sage grouse. Auk 102:621–627Google Scholar
  8. Erikstad KE, Pedersen HC, Steen JB (1985) Clutch size and egg size variation in willow grouse Lagopus l. lagopus. Orn Scand 16:88–94Google Scholar
  9. Gratto CL, Morrison RIG, Cooke F (1985) Philopatry, site tenacity, and mate fidelity in the semipalmated sandpiper. Auk 102:16–24Google Scholar
  10. Greenwood PJ (1980) Mating systems, philopatry and dispersal in birds and mammals. Anim Behav 28:1140–1162Google Scholar
  11. 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
  12. Hannon SJ (1984) Factors limiting polygyny in the willow ptarmigan. Anim Behav 32:153–161Google Scholar
  13. Hannon SJ, Smith JNM (1984) Factors influencing age-related reproductive success in the willow ptarmigan. Auk 101:848–854Google Scholar
  14. Herzog PW, Keppie DM (1980) Migration in a local population of spruce grouse. Condor 82:366–372Google Scholar
  15. Howard RD (1979) Estimating reproductive success in natural populations. Amer Nat 114:221–231Google Scholar
  16. Jefferies RL, Jensen A, Abraham KF (1979) Vegetational development and the effect of geese on the vegetation at La Perouse Bay, Manitoba. Can J Bot 57:1439–1450Google Scholar
  17. Keppie DM (1979) Dispersal, overwinter mortality, and recruitment of spruce grouse. J Wildl Manage 43:717–727Google Scholar
  18. Lance AN (1978) Survival and recruitment success of individual young cock red grouse Lagopus l. scoticus tracked by radiotelemetry. Ibis 120:368–378Google Scholar
  19. Martin K (1984)a Reproductive defence priorities of male willow ptarmigan (Lagopus lagopus): enhancing mate survival or extending paternity options? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 16:57–63Google Scholar
  20. Martin K (1984)b Intraspecific nest parasitism in willow ptarmigan. J Field Ornithol 55:250–251Google Scholar
  21. Martin K (1985) The utility of bi-parental care in willow ptarmigan: ecological and evolutionary considerations. PhD thesis, Queen's University, Kingston, OntarioGoogle Scholar
  22. Martin K, Cooke F (1985) Bi-parental cave in willow ptarmigan: a luxury? Anim Behav 35:369–379Google Scholar
  23. Moss R, Watson A (1985) Adaptive value of spacing behaviour in population cycles of red grouse and other animals. In: Sibly RM, Smith RH (eds) Behavioural Ecology, Ecological consequences of adaptive behaviour. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 275–294Google Scholar
  24. Myrberget S (1967) Reproductive success of young and old willow ptarmigan Lagopus lagopus lagopus in north Norway. Finn Game Res 30:169–172Google Scholar
  25. Newton I, Marquiss M (1983) Dispersal of sparrowhawks between birthplace and breeding place. J Anim Ecol 52:463–477Google Scholar
  26. Perrins CM (1963) Survival of the great tit, Parus major. Proc 13th Internat Ornithol Congr pp 717–728Google Scholar
  27. Shields WM (1982) Philopatry, inbreeding and the evolution of sex. State University of New York Press, AlbanyGoogle Scholar
  28. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1981) Biometry. WH Freeman & Co., San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  29. Weeden RB (1960) The birds of Chilkat Pass, British Columbia. Can Field-Nat 74:119–129Google Scholar
  30. Weeden RB (1964) Spatial separation of sexes in rock and willow ptarmigan in winter. Auk 81:534–541Google Scholar
  31. Wittenberger JF (1978) The evolution of mating systems in grouse. Condor 80:126–137Google Scholar
  32. Zwickel FC (1983) Factors affecting the return of young blue grouse to breeding range. Can J Zool 61:1128–1132Google Scholar
  33. Zwickel FC, Bendell JF (1967) A snare for capturing blue grouse. J Wildl Manage 31:202–204Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. Martin
    • 1
  • S. J. Hannon
    • 2
  1. 1.Boreal InstituteUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada
  2. 2.Department of ZoologyUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada

Personalised recommendations