Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 54, Issue 5, pp 465–471

Do male barn swallows (Hirundo rustica) experience a trade-off between the expression of multiple sexual signals?

  • Nicola Saino
  • Maria Romano
  • Roberto Sacchi
  • Paola Ninni
  • Paolo Galeotti
  • Anders Pape Møller
Original Article

Abstract

Some sexual selection models envisage exaggerated male secondary sexual characters to be costly and therefore reliable indicators of the quality of potential mates to choosy females. If male secondary sexual characters have a natural selection cost, they may be linked to each other by reciprocally constraining relationships that would prevent individual males from increasing their level of multiple signaling. Barn swallow (Hirundo rustica) males have at least two costly signals relevant to socio-sexual interactions: tail length and song. Under the hypothesis that a trade-off exists between male signals, we manipulated the maintenance cost of tail ornaments to test whether this reduced the quantity and quality of song, a condition-dependent, phenotypically plastic signal. Contrary to our expectation, tail elongation had no effect on singing activity and song complexity. However, tail-elongated males produced songs with longer terminal parts ('rattles'). Long rattles are associated with highly competitive social contexts and high circulating levels of testosterone, suggesting that tail-elongated males were more frequently involved in either male-male aggressive or inter-sexual interactions. Therefore, this study shows that males are not displaying multiple signals at the maximum possible level, implying that this system is open to unreliable communication. However, long-term trade-offs between signal expression and viability may prevent males from displaying both signals at higher rates.

Keywords

Condition-dependent signals Hirundo rustica Multiple signals Reliable communication Sexual selection 

References

  1. Andersson M (1986) Evolution of condition-dependent sex ornaments and mating preferences: sexual selection based on viability differences. Evolution 40:804–820Google Scholar
  2. Andersson M (1994) Sexual selection. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  3. Eberhardt LS (1994) Oxygen consumption during singing by male Carolina wrens (Thryothorus ludovicianus). Auk 111:124–130Google Scholar
  4. Falconer DS (1981) Introduction to quantitative genetics. Longman, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. Galeotti P, Saino N, Sacchi R, Møller AP (1997) Song correlates with social context, testosterone and body condition in male barn swallows. Anim Behav 53:687–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Grafen A (1990) Sexual selection unhandicapped by the Fisher process. J Theor Biol 144:517–546PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Heywood JS (1989) Sexual selection by the handicap mechanism. Evolution 43:1387–1397Google Scholar
  8. Horn AG, Leonard ML, Weary DM (1995) Oxygen consumption during crowing by roosters: talk is cheap. Anim Behav 50:1171–1175Google Scholar
  9. Iwasa Y, Pomiankowski A (1994) The evolution of mate preferences for multiple sexual ornaments. Evolution 48:853–867Google Scholar
  10. Iwasa Y, Pomiankowski A, Nee S (1991) The evolution of costly mate preferences. II. The "handicap" principle. Evolution 45:1431–1442Google Scholar
  11. Johnstone RA (1995). Honest advertisement of multiple qualities using multiple signals. J Theor Biol 177:87–94Google Scholar
  12. Lambrechts M, Dhondt AA (1988) The anti-exhaustion hypothesis: a new hypothesis to explain song performance and song switching in the great tit. Anim Behav 36:327–334Google Scholar
  13. Møller AP (1987) Social control of deception among status signalling house sparrows Passer domesticus. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 20:307–311Google Scholar
  14. Møller AP (1988) Female choice selects for male sexual tail ornaments in the monogamous barn swallow. Nature 332:640–642Google Scholar
  15. Møller AP (1989) Viability costs of male tail ornaments in a swallow. Nature 339:132–135.Google Scholar
  16. Møller AP (1990) Male tail length and female mate choice in the monogamous swallow (Hirundo rustica). Anim Behav 39:458–465Google Scholar
  17. Møller AP (1991a) Parasites, sexual ornaments, and mate choice in the barn swallow. In: Loye J, Zuk M (eds) Bird-parasite interactions: ecology, evolution and behaviour. Oxford Univ Press, Oxford, pp 328–348Google Scholar
  18. Møller AP (1991b) Viability is positively related to degree of ornamentation in male swallows. Proc R Soc Lond B 243:145–148Google Scholar
  19. Møller AP (1991c) Parasite load reduces song output in a passerine bird. Anim Behav 41:723–730Google Scholar
  20. Møller AP (1993) Female preference for apparently symmetrical male sexual ornaments in the barn swallow Hirundo rustica. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 32:371–376Google Scholar
  21. Møller AP (1994) Sexual selection and the barn swallow. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  22. Møller AP, de Lope F (1994) Differential costs of a secondary sexual character: An experimental test of the handicap principle. Evolution 48:1676–1683Google Scholar
  23. Møller AP, Pomiankowski A (1993) Why have birds got multiple sexual ornaments? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 32:167–176Google Scholar
  24. Møller AP, de Lope F, Saino N (1995a) Sexual selection in the barn swallow Hirundo rustica. Aerodynamic adaptations. J Evol Biol 8:671–687Google Scholar
  25. Møller AP, de Lope F, Lopez Caballero JM (1995b) Foraging costs of a tail ornament: Experimental evidence from two populations of barn swallows Hirundo rustica with different degrees of sexual size dimorphism. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 37:289–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Møller AP, Saino N, Taramino G, Galeotti P, Ferrario S (1998) Paternity and multiple signaling: effects of a secondary sexual character and song on paternity in the barn swallow. Am Nat 151:236–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Omland KE (1996a) Female mallard mating preferences for multiple male ornaments. I. Natural variation. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 39:353–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Omland KE (1996b) Female mallard mating preferences for multiple male ornaments. II. Experimental variation. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 39:361–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rohwer S (1977) Status signaling in Harris sparrows: Some experiments in deception. Behaviour 61:107–129Google Scholar
  30. Rohwer S, Rohwer FC (1978) Status signalling in Harris sparrows: experimental deceptions achieved. Anim Behav 26:1012–1022Google Scholar
  31. Rowe C (1999) Receiver psychology and the evolution of multi-component signals. Anim Behav 58:921–931Google Scholar
  32. Rubolini D, Schiavi M (2002) Tail length correlates with fat stores in pre-migratory roosting barn swallows Hirundo rustica, Ardea 90:121–127Google Scholar
  33. Saino N, Møller AP (1994) Secondary sexual characters, parasites and testosterone in the barn swallow Hirundo rustica. Anim Behav 48:1325–1333Google Scholar
  34. Saino N, Møller AP (1995) Testosterone correlates of mate-guarding, singing and aggressive behaviour in male barn swallows (Hirundo rustica). Anim Behav 49:465–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Saino N, Møller AP (1996) Sexual ornamentation and immunocompetence in the barn swallow. Behav Ecol 7:227–232Google Scholar
  36. Saino N, Møller AP, Bolzern AM (1995) Testosterone effects on the immune system and parasite infestations in the barn swallow (Hirundo rustica): an experimental test of the immuno-competence hypothesis. Behav Ecol 6:397–404Google Scholar
  37. Saino N, Bolzern AM, Møller AP (1997a) Immunocompetence, ornamentation and viability of male barn swallows (Hirundo rustica). Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94:549–552CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Saino N, Cuervo JJ, Krivacek M, de Lope F, Møller AP (1997b) Experimental manipulation of tail ornament size affects haematocrit of male barn swallows (Hirundo rustica). Oecologia 110:186–190Google Scholar
  39. Saino N, Galeotti P, Sacchi R, Møller AP (1997c) Song and immunological condition in male barn swallows (Hirundo rustica). Behav Ecol 8:364–371Google Scholar
  40. Saino N, Primmer CR, Ellegren H, Møller AP (1997d) An experimental study of paternity and tail ornamentation in the barn swallow (Hirundo rustica). Evolution 51:562–570Google Scholar
  41. Saino N, Calza S, Ninni P, Møller AP (1999) Barn swallows trade survival against offspring condition and immunocompetence. J Anim Ecol 68:999–1009Google Scholar
  42. Saino N, Bertacche V, Ferrari RP, Martinelli R, Møller AP, Stradi R (2002a) Carotenoid concentration in barn swallow eggs is influenced by laying order, maternal infection and paternal ornamentation. Proc R Soc Lond B 269:1729–1733CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Saino N, Ferrari RP, Martinelli R, Romano M, Rubolini D, Møller AP (2002b) Early maternal effects mediated by immunity depend on sexual ornamentation of the male partner. Proc R Soc Lond B 269:1005–1009CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Saino N, Incagli M, Martinelli R, Møller AP (2002c) Immune response of male barn swallows in relation to parental effort, corticosterone plasma levels, and sexual ornamentation. Behav Ecol 13:169–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Specht R (2001) AvisoftSAS LabPro, sound analysis and synthesis laboratory: a PC-software for Ms-Windows users' guide. http://home.t-online.de/home/raimund.specht/upd39.exe. Cited 5 May 2003Google Scholar
  46. Vehrencamp SL, Bradbury JW, Gibson RM (1989) The energetic cost of display in male sage grouse. Anim Behav 38:885–898Google Scholar
  47. Wingfield JC, Ball GF, Dufty AM Jr, Hegner RE, Ramenofsky M (1987) Testosterone and aggression in birds. Am Sci 75:602–608Google Scholar
  48. Zahavi A (1975) Mate selection: a selection for a handicap. J Theor Biol 53:205–214PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Zahavi A (1977) The cost of honesty (further remarks on the handicap principle). J Theor Biol 67:603–605PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Zuk M, Thornhill R, Ligon J, Johnson K, Austad K, Ligon SH, Thornhill NW, Costin C (1990) The role of male ornaments and courtship behavior in female mate choice of red jungle fowl. Am Nat 136:459–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicola Saino
    • 1
  • Maria Romano
    • 1
  • Roberto Sacchi
    • 2
  • Paola Ninni
    • 3
  • Paolo Galeotti
    • 2
  • Anders Pape Møller
    • 3
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Biologia, Sez. EcologiaUniversità degli Studi di Milano20133 MilanoItaly
  2. 2.Dipartimento di Biologia AnimaleUniversità degli Studi di Pavia27100 PaviaItaly
  3. 3.Laboratoire de Parasitologie Evolutive, CNRS UMR 7103Université Pierre et Marie CurieFrance

Personalised recommendations