, 167:413 | Cite as

Breaking the rules: sex roles and genetic mating system of the pheasant coucal

  • G. Maurer
  • M. C. Double
  • O. Milenkaya
  • M. Süsser
  • R. D. Magrath
Behavioral ecology - Original Paper


Generally in birds, the classic sex roles of male competition and female choice result in females providing most offspring care while males face uncertain parentage. In less than 5% of species, however, reversed courtship sex roles lead to predominantly male care and low extra-pair paternity. These role-reversed species usually have reversed sexual size dimorphism and polyandry, confirming that sexual selection acts most strongly on the sex with the smaller parental investment and accordingly higher potential reproductive rate. We used parentage analyses and observations from three field seasons to establish the social and genetic mating system of pheasant coucals, Centropus phasianinus, a tropical nesting cuckoo, where males are much smaller than females and provide most parental care. Pheasant coucals are socially monogamous and in this study males produced about 80% of calls in the dawn chorus, implying greater male sexual competition. Despite the substantial male investments, extra-pair paternity was unusually high for a socially monogamous, duetting species. Using two or more mismatches to determine extra-pair parentage, we found that 11 of 59 young (18.6%) in 10 of 21 broods (47.6%) were not sired by their putative father. Male incubation, starting early in the laying sequence, may give the female opportunity and reason to seek these extra-pair copulations. Monogamy, rather than the polyandry and sex-role reversal typical of its congener, C. grillii, may be the result of the large territory size, which could prevent females from monopolising multiple males. The pheasant coucal’s exceptional combination of classic sex-roles and male-biased care for extra-pair young is hard to reconcile with current sexual selection theory, but may represent an intermediate stage in the evolution of polyandry or an evolutionary remnant of polyandry.


Extra-pair paternity Parental care Polyandry Sex-role reversal Sexual size dimorphism 



We thank S. Musgrave, A. Quellmalz, S. Quinlan, C. Smith, M. Starling, R. Noske and W. Goymann with planning and conducting the fieldwork, and N. Beck, S. Cooney, N. Langmore and two anonymous reviewers for comments on earlier drafts. The study received support from the Stuart Leslie Bird Research Award, the Cayley Memorial Scholarship, the Ingram trust, and The North Australia Research Unit. The work was conducted under permits from Parks Northern Territory (16973) and the Ethics Committee of the Australian National University (F.BTZ.56.03) and complies with the laws and regulations of the Commonwealth of Australia.


  1. Andersson M (1994) Sexual selection. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersson M (1995) Evolution of reversed sex roles, sexual size dimorphism, and mating system in coucals (Centropodidae, Aves). Biol J Linn Soc 54:173–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andersson M (2005) Evolution of classical polyandry: three steps to female emancipation. Ethology 111:1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Andersson M, Norberg RA (1981) Evolution of reversed sexual size dimorphism and role partitioning among predatory birds, with a size scaling of flight performance. Biol J Linn Soc 15:105–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Birkhead TR, Møller AP (1992) Sperm competition in birds: evolutionary causes and consequences. Academic, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Blanckenhorn WU (2005) Behavioral causes and consequences of sexual size dimorphism. Ethology 111:977–1016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brohede J, Primmer CR, Møller A, Ellegren H (2002) Heterogeneity in the rate and pattern of germline mutation at individual microsatellite loci. Nucleic Acids Res 30:1997–2003PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Butchart SHM, Seddon N, Ekstrom JMM (1999) Polyandry and competition for territories in bronze-winged jacanas. J Anim Ecol 68:928–939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Calder WAI (1967) Breeding behavior of the roadrunner, Geococcyx californianus. Auk 84:597–598Google Scholar
  10. Carlson A (1989) Courtship feeding and clutch size in red-backed shrikes (Lanius collurio). Am Nat 133:454–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clutton-Brock TH (1991) The evolution of parental care. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  12. Clutton-Brock TH, Parker GA (1992) Potential reproductive rates and the operation of sexual selection. Q Rev Biol 67:437–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Clutton-Brock TH, Vincent ACJ (1991) Sexual selection and the potential reproductive rates of males and females. Nature 351:58–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cockburn A (2006) Prevalence of different modes of parental care in birds. Proc Biol Sci 273:1375–1383PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Colwell MA, Oring LW (1989) Extra-pair mating in the spotted sandpiper: a female mate acquisition tactic. Anim Behav 38:675–684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Darwin C (1871) The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. John Murray, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dawkins R, Carlisle TR (1976) Parental investment, mate desertion and a fallacy. Nature 262:131–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Delehanty DJ, Fleischer RC, Colwell MA, Oring LW (1998) Sex-role reversal and the absence of extra-pair fertilization in Wilson’s phalaropes. Anim Behav 55:995–1002PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Emlen ST, Wrege PH (2004) Size dimorphism, intrasexual competition, and sexual selection in wattled jacana (Jacana jacana), a sex-role-reversed shorebird in Panama. Auk 121:391–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Geberzahn N, Goymann W, Muck C, ten Cate C (2009) Females alter their song when challenged in a sex-role reversed bird species. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 64:193–204PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gill SA, Vonhof MJ, Stutchbury BJ, Morton ES, Quinn JS (2005) No evidence for acoustic mate-guarding in duetting buff-breasted wrens (Thryothorus leucotis). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 57:557–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Goymann W, Wingfield JC (2004) Competing females and caring males. Sex steroids in African black coucals, Centropus grillii. Anim Behav 68:733–740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Goymann W, Wittenzellner A, Wingfield J (2004) Competing females and caring males. Polyandry and sex-role reversal in African black coucals, Centropus grillii. Ethology 110:807–823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Goymann W, Kempenaers B, Wingfield J (2005) Breeding biology, sexually dimorphic development and nestling testosterone concentrations of the classically polyandrous African black coucal, Centropus grillii. J Ornithol 146:314–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Griffith SC, Owens IPF, Thuman KA (2002) Extra pair paternity in birds: a review of interspecific variation and adaptive function. Mol Ecol 11:2195–2212PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Griffiths R, Double MC, Orr K, Dawson RJG (1998) A DNA test to sex most birds. Mol Ecol 7:1071–1075PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hall ML (2004) A review of hypotheses for the functions of avian duetting. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 55:415–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hall ML (2009) A review of vocal duetting in birds. Adv Stud Behav 40:67–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hall ML, Magrath RD (2000) Duetting and mate-guarding in Australian magpie-larks (Grallina cyanoleuca). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 47:180–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Heinsohn R, Legge S, Endler JA (2005) Extreme reversed sexual dichromatism in a bird without sex role reversal. Science 309:617–619PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hicks RK, Restall R (1992) Pheasant coucal Centropus phasianinus attacking birds caught in a mist net. Muruk 5:143Google Scholar
  32. Higgins PJ (1999) Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic birds. Volume 4: parrots to Dollarbirds. Oxford University Press, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  33. Jenni DA (1974) Evolution of polyandry in birds. Am Zool 14:129–144Google Scholar
  34. Jones RC, Lin M (1993) Spermatogenesis in birds. Oxf Rev Reprod Biol 15:234–264Google Scholar
  35. Klump GM (1996) Bird communication in a noisy world. In: Kroodsma DE, Miller EH (eds) Ecology and evolution of acoustic communication in birds. Cornell University press, Ithaca, pp 321–338Google Scholar
  36. Kokko H, Jennions M (2008) Parental investment, sexual selection and sex ratios. J Evol Biol 21:919–948PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lack D (1968) Ecological adaptations for breeding in birds. Methuen, LondonGoogle Scholar
  38. Langmore NE (1998) Functions of duet and solo songs of female birds. Trends Ecol Evol 13:136–140PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Marshall TC, Slate J, Kruuk LEB, Pemberton JM (1998) Statistical confidence for likelihood-based paternity inference in natural populations. Mol Ecol 7:639–655PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Maurer G (2007a) Ecology and evolution of sex-roles in the pheasant coucal Centropus phasianinus. Australian National University, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  41. Maurer G (2007b) Love is in the air: arboreal copulations in the pheasant coucal Centropus phasianinus. North Territory Nat 19:48–50Google Scholar
  42. Maurer G (2008) Who cares? Males provide most parental care in a monogamous nesting cuckoo. Ethology 114:540–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Maurer G, Hale ML, Verduijn MH, Wolff K (2005) Polymorphic microsatellite loci in pheasant coucal (Centropus phasianinus). Mol Ecol Notes 5:337–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Maurer G, Smith C, Süsser M, Magrath RD (2008) Solo and duet calling in the pheasant coucal: sex and individual call differences in a nesting cuckoo with reversed sexual size dimorphism. Aust J Zool 56:143–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Maurer G, Beck N, Double MC (2009) A ‘feather-trap’ for collecting DNA samples from birds. Mol Ecol Resour 10:129–134PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Maynard Smith J (1977) Parental investment: a prospective analysis. Anim Behav 25:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Maynard Smith J (1978) The evolution of sex. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  48. Michalek KG, Winkler H (2001) Parental care and parentage in monogamous great spotted woodpeckers (Picoides major) and middle spotted woodpeckers (Picoides medius). Behaviour 138:1259–1285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Muck C, Kempenaers B, Kuhn S, Valcu M, Goymann W (2009) Paternity in the classical polyandrous black coucal (Centropus grillii)—a cuckoo accepting cuckoldry? Behav Ecol 20:1185–1193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Nicholls JA, Double MC, Rowell DM, Magrath RD (2000) The evolution of cooperative and pair breeding in thornbills Acanthiza (Pardalotidae). J Avian Biol 31:165–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Nisbet ICT (1973) Courtship-feeding, egg-size and breeding success in common terns. Nature 241:141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Oring LW, Lank DB (1986) Polyandry in spotted sandpipers: the impact of environment and experience. In: Rubenstein DR, Wrangham RW (eds) Ecological aspects of social evolution. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 21–42Google Scholar
  53. Oring LW, Fleischer RC, Reed JM, Marsden KE (1992) Cuckoldry through stored sperm in the sequentially polyandrous spotted sandpiper. Nature 359:631–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Owens IPF (2002) Male-only care and classical polyandry in birds: phylogeny, ecology and sex differences in remating opportunities. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B 357:283–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Payne RB (2005) Bird families of the world: the Cuckoos. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  56. Petrie M, Kempenaers B (1998) Extra-pair paternity in birds: explaining variation between species and populations. Trends Ecol Evol 13:52–58PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Pierce EP, Lifjeld JT (1998) High paternity without paternity assurance behaviour in the purple sandpiper, a species with high paternal investment. Auk 115:602–612Google Scholar
  58. Rahn H, Paganelli CV, Ar A (1975) Relation of avian egg weight to body weight. Auk 92:750–765Google Scholar
  59. Ralph CP (1975) Life style of Coccyzus pumilus, a tropical cuckoo. Condor 77:60–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Sheldon B (2002) Relating paternity to paternal care. Philos Trans R Soc Lond 357:341–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Slotow R (1996) Black coucal, Centropus grillii, egg volume predicts their polyandrous mating system. J Avian Biol 27:171–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Staicer CA, Spector DA, Horn AG (1996) The dawn chorus and other diel patterns in acoustic signalling. In: Kroodsma DE, Miller EH (eds) Ecology and evolution of acoustic comminucation in birds. Cornell University Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  63. Szekely T, Reynolds JD, Figuerola J (2000) Sexual size dimorphism in shorebirds, gulls, and alcids: the influence of sexual and natural selection. Evolution 54:1404–1413PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Taplin A, Beurteaux Y (1992) Aspects of the breeding biology of the pheasant coucal, Centropus phasianinus. Emu 92:141–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Trivers RL (1972) Parental investment and sexual selection. In: Cambell B (ed) Sexual selection and the descent of man. Aldine, Chicago, pp 136–179Google Scholar
  66. Vernon CJ (1971) Notes on the biology of the black coucal. Ostrich 42:242–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Vincent A, Ahnesjo I, Berglund A, Rosenqvist G (1992) Pipefishes and seahorses: are they all sex role reversed? Trends Ecol Evol 7:237–241PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Voigt C, Goymann W (2007) Sex-role reversal is reflected in the brain of African black coucals (Centropus grillii). Dev Neurobiol 67:1560–1573PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Weising K, Wolff K, Nybom H, Meyer W (1995) DNA fingerprinting in plants and fungi. CRC, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  70. Westneat DF, Sherman PW (1993) Parentage and the evolution of parental behavior. Behav Ecol 4:66–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Whitfield DP (1995) Behaviour and ecology of a polyandrous population of grey phalaropes Phalaropus fulicarius in Iceland. J Avian Biol 26:349–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Wright J (1998) Paternity and paternal care. In: Møller AP, Birkhead TR (eds) Sperm competition and sexual selection. Academic, San Diego, pp 117–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Maurer
    • 1
    • 5
  • M. C. Double
    • 2
    • 5
  • O. Milenkaya
    • 3
  • M. Süsser
    • 4
  • R. D. Magrath
    • 5
  1. 1.Centre for OrnithologyUniversity of BirminghamBirminghamUK
  2. 2.Australian Antarctic DivisionKingstonAustralia
  3. 3.Department of Biological SciencesVirginia TechBlacksburgUSA
  4. 4.Naturschutzbund DeutschlandBerlinGermany
  5. 5.Research School of BiologyThe Australian National University CanberraCanberraAustralia

Personalised recommendations