Journal of Comparative Physiology B

, Volume 178, Issue 6, pp 735–743 | Cite as

Antioxidants in eggs of great tits Parus major from Chernobyl and hatching success

  • Anders Pape Møller
  • Filis Karadas
  • Timothy A. Mousseau
Original Paper
First Online:
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:

Abstract

Antioxidants are powerful protectors against the damaging effects of free radicals that constitute the inevitable by-products of aerobic metabolism. Growing embryos are particularly susceptible to the damaging effects of free radicals produced during rapid growth, and mothers of many species provide protection against such damage by allocating antioxidants to their eggs. Birds living in radioactively contaminated areas use dietary antioxidants to cope with the damaging effects of radiation, but females also allocate dietary antioxidants to eggs, potentially enforcing a physiological trade-off between self-maintenance and reproductive investment. Here we tested whether female great tits Parus major breeding in radioactively contaminated study areas near Chernobyl allocated less dietary antioxidants to eggs, and whether such reduced allocation of dietary antioxidants to eggs had fitness consequences. Concentrations of total yolk carotenoids and vitamins A and E were depressed near Chernobyl compared to concentrations in a less contaminated Ukrainian study area and a French control study area, and all antioxidants showed dose-dependent relationships with all three dietary antioxidants decreasing with increasing level of radiation at nest boxes. These effects held even when controlling statistically for potentially confounding habitat variables and covariation among antioxidants. Laying date was advanced and clutch size increased at nest boxes with high dose rates. Hatching success increased with increasing concentration of vitamin E, implying that hatching success decreased at boxes with high levels of radiation, eventually eliminating and even reversing the higher potential reproductive output associated with early reproduction and large clutch size. These findings are consistent with the hypothesis that radioactive contamination reduced levels of dietary antioxidants in yolks, with negative consequences for hatching success and reproductive success.

Keywords

Antioxidants Clutch size Dose rate Hatching success Laying date 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to S. Gaschak, G. Milinevski, A. M. Peklo, E. Pysanets, I. Chizhevsky, O. Bondarenko, and M. Bondarkov for logistic help during our visits to Ukraine. C. Biard kindly provided information on yolk composition from France. We received funding from the CNRS (France), the University of South Carolina School of the Environment, Bill Murray and the Samuel Freeman Charitable Trust, the Civilian Research Development Foundation, the National Science Foundation and the National Geographic Society to conduct this research.

References

  1. Alonso-Alvarez C, Bertrand S, Devevey G, Prost J, Faivre B, Sorci G (2004) Increased susceptibility to oxidative stress as a proximate cost of reproduction. Ecol Lett 7:363–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barja G, Cadenas S, Rojas C, Perez Campo R, Lopes Torres M (1994) Low mitochondrial free radical production per unit of O2 consumption can explain the simultaneous presence of high longevity and high aerobic rate in birds. Free Radic Res 21:317–318PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bazhan KV (1998) Lipid peroxidation and the antioxidant system in subjects exposed to the influence of extreme factors. Lik Sprava 8:47–50PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Ben-Amotz A, Yatziv S, Sela M, Greenberg S, Rachmilevich B, Shwarzman M, Weshler Z (1998) Effect of natural beta-carotene supplementation in children exposed to radiation from the Chernobyl accident. Radiat Environ Biophys 37:187–193PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berthold P (2001) Bird migration. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  6. Biard C (2004) Evolutionary ecology of maternal effects mediated by antioxidants in birds. Laboratoire de Parasitologie Evolutive, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, ParisGoogle Scholar
  7. Biard C, Surai PF, Møller AP (2006) Carotenoid availability in diet and phenotype of blue and great tit nestlings. J Exp Biol 209:1004–1015PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Biard C, Surai PF, Møller AP (2007) An analysis of pre- and post-hatching maternal effects mediated by carotenoids in the blue tit. J Evol Biol 20:326–339PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blount JD, Houston DC, Surai PF, Møller AP (2003) Egg-laying capacity is limited by carotenoid pigment availability in wild gulls Larus fuscus. Proc R Soc Lond B (Biol Lett) 271:S79–S81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chaialo PP, Bereza VI, Chobot’ko GM (1991) Free-radical processes and blood antioxidant systems in the late period following acute radiation sickness. Med Radiol (Moscow) 36:20–21Google Scholar
  11. Clutton-Brock TH (1984) Reproductive effort and terminal investment. Am Nat 123:212–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Costantini D, Casagrande S, De Filippis S, Brambilla G, Fanfani A, Tagliavini J, Dell’Omo G (2006) Correlates of oxidative stress in wild kestrel nestlings (Falco tinnunculus). J Comp Physiol B 176:329–337PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Costantini D, Fanfani A, Dell’Omo G (2007) Carotenoid availability does not limit the capability of nestling kestrels (Falco tinnunculus) to cope with oxidative stress. J Exp Biol 210:1238–1244PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cramp S, Perrins CM (ed) (1988–1993) The birds of the Western Palearctic. vols 5–7, Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  15. Halliwell BH, Gutteridge JMC (1999) Free radicals in biology and medicine. 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  16. Holmes DJ, Flückiger R, Austad SN (2001) Comparative biology of aging in birds: an update. Exp Gerontol 36:869–883PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hõrak P, Vellau H, Ots I, Møller AP (2000) Growth conditions affect carotenoid-based plumage coloration of great tit nestlings. Naturwissenschaften 87:460–464PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hõrak P, Surai PF, Møller AP (2002) Fat-soluble antioxidants in the eggs of great tits Parus major in relation to breeding habitat and laying sequence. Avian Sci 2:123–130Google Scholar
  19. Ivaniota L, Dubchak AS, Tyshchenko VK (1998) Free radical oxidation of lipids and antioxidant system of blood in infertile women in a radioactive environment. Ukr Biokhim Zh 70:132–135PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Koutsos EA, Clifford AJ, Calvert CC, Klasing KC (2003) Maternal carotenoid status modifies the incorporation of dietary carotenoids into immune tissues of growing chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus). J Nutr 133:1132–1138PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Kumerova AO, Lece AG, Skesters AP, Orlikov GA, Seleznev JV, Rainsford KD (2000) Antioxidant defense and trace element imbalance in patients with postradiation syndrome: first report on phase I studies. Biol Trace Elem Res 77:1–12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Leffler JE (1993) An introduction to free radicals. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Lykholat EA, Chernaya VI (1999) Parameters of peroxidation and proteolysis in the organism of the liquidators of Chernobyl accident consequences. Ukr Biokhim Zh 71:82–85PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Møller AP, Mousseau TA (2007a) Birds prefer to breed in sites with low radioactivity in Chernobyl. Proc R Soc Lond B 274:1443–1448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Møller AP, Mousseau TA (2007b) Determinants of interspecific variation in population declines of birds from exposure to radiation at Chernobyl. J Appl Ecol 44:909–919CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Møller AP, Biard C, Blount JD, Houston DC, Ninni P, Saino N, Surai PF (2000) Carotenoid-dependant signals: indicators of foraging efficiency, immunocompetence or detoxification ability? Avian Poult Biol Rev 11:137–159Google Scholar
  27. Møller AP, Mousseau TA, Milinevski G, Peklo A, Pysanets E, Szép T (2005a) Condition, reproduction and survival of barn swallows from Chernobyl. J Anim Ecol 74:1102–1111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Møller AP, Surai PF, Mousseau TA (2005b) Antioxidants, radiation and mutation in barn swallows from Chernobyl. Proc R Soc Lond B 272:247–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Møller AP, Hobson KA, Mousseau TA, Peklo AM (2006) Chernobyl as a population sink for barn swallows: tracking dispersal using stable isotope profiles. Ecol Appl 16:1696–1705PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mousseau TA, Fox CW (eds) (1998) Maternal effects as adaptations. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  31. Neyfakh EA, Alimbekova AI, Ivanenko GF (1998a) Vitamin E and A deficiencies in children correlate with Chernobyl radiation loads of their mothers. Biochemistry (Mosc) 63:1138–1143Google Scholar
  32. Neyfakh EA, Alimbekova AI, Ivanenko GF (1998b) Radiation-induced lipoperoxidative stress in children coupled with deficit of essential antioxidants. Biochemistry (Mosc) 63:977–987Google Scholar
  33. Paradis E, Baillie SR, Sutherland WJ, Gregory RD (1998) Patterns of natal and breeding dispersal in birds. J Anim Ecol 67:518–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pärt T, Gustafsson L, Moreno J (1992) Terminal investment and a sexual conflict in the collared flycatcher (Ficedula albicollis). Am Nat 140:868–882CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Perrins CM (1979) British tits. Collins, LondonGoogle Scholar
  36. Saino N, Ferrari RP, Romano M, Martinelli R, Møller AP (2003) Experimental manipulation of egg carotenoids affects immunity of barn swallow nestlings. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:2485–2489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Shestopalov VM (1996) Atlas of Chernobyl exclusion zone. Ukrainian Academy of Science, KievGoogle Scholar
  38. Surai PF (2000) Effect of selenium and vitamin E content of the maternal diet on the antioxidant system of the yolk and the developing chick. Br Poult Sci 41:235–243PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Surai PF (2002) Natural antioxidants in avian nutrition and reproduction. Nottingham University Press, NottinghamGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anders Pape Møller
    • 1
  • Filis Karadas
    • 2
  • Timothy A. Mousseau
    • 3
  1. 1.Laboratoire de Parasitologie Evolutive, CNRS UMR 7103Université Pierre et Marie CurieParis Cedex 05France
  2. 2.Department of Animal ScienceUniversity of Yüzüncü YilVanTurkey
  3. 3.Department of Biological SciencesUniversity of South CarolinaColumbiaUSA

Personalised recommendations