Advertisement

Journal of Ornithology

, Volume 150, Issue 2, pp 469–481 | Cite as

Reproductive success and individual variation in feeding frequency of House Sparrows (Passer domesticus)

  • Thor H. Ringsby
  • Torborg Berge
  • Bernt-Erik Saether
  • Henrik Jensen
Original Article

Abstract

Parental care is assumed to be closely associated with individual differences in reproductive success. We investigated how feeding frequencies varied among parents and how this affected the subsequent reproductive success in insular populations of House Sparrows Passer domesticus in northern Norway. Female parents fed their offspring more than male parents did, and the feeding rates were positively related to the feeding rates of the partner. A positive relationship between feeding rates and bill depth was present in females. In males, the feeding rates were negatively related to total badge size and positively related to visible badge size, after the effect of other variables had been taken into account. A non-linear convex relationship between feeding frequency and hatch day was present in males, which could reflect either the seasonal change in weather conditions or the seasonal variation in food availability. For both sexes, feeding frequencies increased with increasing brood size, but at the same time the average feeding rate per nestling decreased with increased brood sizes. Finally, our results indicate that the amount of parental investment, measured as feeding rates during the nestling stage, may have a positive long-term influence both on the number of fledglings that recruit as well as the probability that fledglings survive until recruitment.

Keywords

Feeding rate House sparrow Micro transponder Passer domesticus Parental care Reproductive success 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to H. Ellegren and S.C. Griffith for helping with the genetic parenthood analyses. We also thank A. Altwegg and N.M. Pedersen for help in the field and D.W. Mock for useful comments on the manuscript. The study complied with the laws of animal welfare in Norway at the time the study was conducted. This study was supported with grants from the European Commission (project METABIRD) and the Research Council of Norway (Program for Conservation of Biodiversity, Strategic University Program in Conservation Biology and Storforsk).

References

  1. Altwegg R, Ringsby TH, Sæther B-E (2000) Phenotypic correlates and consequences of dispersal in a metapopulation of house sparrows Passer domesticus. J Anim Ecol 69:762–770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson TR (2006) Biology of the ubiquitous house sparrow. From genes to populations. Oxford University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andersson M (1994) Sexual selection, monographs in behavior and ecology. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  4. Andersson M, Simmons LW (2006) Sexual selection and mate choice. TREE 21:296–302PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Ankney CD, Afton AD, Alisauskas RT (1991) The role of nutrient reserves in limiting waterfowl reproduction. Condor 93:1029–1032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Badyaev AV, Qvarnström A (2002) Putting sexual traits into the context of an organism: a life-history perspective in studies of sexual selection. Auk 119:301–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bedard J, Meunier M (1983) Parental care in the savannah sparrow. Can J Zool 61:2836–2843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Best LB (1977) Nestling biology of the field sparrow. Auk 94:308–319Google Scholar
  9. Biearman GC, Sealy SC (1982) Parental feeding of nestling yellow warblers in relation to brood size and prey availability. Auk 99:332–341Google Scholar
  10. Blums P, Nichols JD, Hines JE, Lindberg MS, Mednis A (2005) Individual quality, survival variation and patterns of phenotypic selection on body condition and timing of nesting in birds. Oecologia 143:365–376PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Borgia G (1993) The cost of display in the non-resource-based mating system of the satin bowerbird. Am Nat 141:729–743CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Bradbury RB, Wilson JD, Moorcroft D, Morris AJ, Perkins AJ (2003) Habitat and weather are weak correlates of nestling condition and growth rates of four UK farmland passerines. Ibis 145:295–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bryant DM, Gardiner A (1979) Energetics of growth in house martins (Delichon urbica). J Zool 189:275–304Google Scholar
  14. Buchanan KL, Evans MR, Goldsmith AR, Bryant DM, Rowe LV (2001) Testosterone influences basal metabolic rate in male house sparrows: a new cost of dominance signalling? Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 268:1337–1344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference. A practical information–theoretic approach, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Chastel O, Kersten M (2002) Brood size and body condition in the house sparrow Passer domesticus: the influence of brooding behaviour. Ibis 144:284–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Clark L (1984) Consequences of homeothermic capacity of nestlings on parental care in the European starling. Oecologia 65:387–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Clutton-Brock TH (1991) The evolution of parental care. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  19. Cronmiller JR, Thompson CF (1980) Experimental manipulations of brood size in red-winged black birds. Auk 97:559–565Google Scholar
  20. Curio E (1959) Verhaltensstudien am Trauerschnäpper: Beiträge zur Etologie und Ökologie von Muscicapa h. hypoleuca Pallas. Z Tierpsykol 3:1–110Google Scholar
  21. Drent RH, Daan S (1980) The prudent parent: energetic adjustments in avian breeding. Ardea 68:225–252Google Scholar
  22. Dunn EH (1976) Relationship between brood size and age of effective homeothermy in nestling house wrens. Wilson Bull 88:478–482Google Scholar
  23. Erikstad KE, Bustnes JO, Moum T (1993) Clutch-size determination in precocial birds: a study of the common eider. Auk 110:623–628Google Scholar
  24. Freitag A, Martinoli A, Urzelai J (2001) Monitoring the feeding activity of nesting birds with an autonomous system: case study of the endangered Wryneck Jynx torquilla. Bird Study 48:102–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fueller RC, Houle D, Travis J (2005) Sensory bias as an explanation for the evolution of mate preferences. Am Nat 166:437–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Getty T (1998) Handicap signalling: when fecundity and viability do not add up. Anim Behav 56:127–130PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gibb J (1950) The breeding biology of the great and blue titmice. Ibis 92:507–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gibb JA (1955) Feeding rates of great tits. Br Birds 48:49–58Google Scholar
  29. Grafen A (1990) Sexual selection unhandicapped by the Fisher process. J Theor Biol 144:473–516PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Grant BR (2003) Evolution in Darwin’s finches: a review of a study on Isla Daphne Major in the Galapagos Archipelago. Zoology 106:255–259PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Grant BR, Grant PR (1989) Evolutionary dynamics of a natural population. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  32. Grant PR (1986) Ecology and evolution of Darwin’s finches. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  33. Grieco F (2002) Time constraint on food choice in provisioning blue tits, Parus caeruleus: the relationship between feeding rate and prey size. Anim Behav 64:517–526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Griffith SC (2000) A trade-off between reproduction and a condition-dependent sexually selected ornament in the house sparrow Passer domesticus. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 267:1115–1119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Griffith SC, Owens IPF, Burke T (1999a) Environmental determination of a sexually selected trait. Nature 400:358–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Griffith SC, Owens IPF, Burke T (1999b) Female choice and annual reproductive success favour less-ornamented male house sparrows. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 266:765–770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hadfield JD, Burgess MD, Lord A, Phillimore AB, Clegg SM, Owens IPF (2006) Direct versus indirect sexual selection: basis of colour, size and recruitment in a wild bird. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 273:1347–1353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Högstedt G (1980) Evolution of clutch size in birds: adaptive variation in relation to territory quality. Science 210:1148–1150PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hussell DJT (1972) Factors affecting clutch size in arctic passerines. Ecol Monogr 42:317–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Iwasa Y, Pomiankowski A (1994) The evolution of mate preferences for multiple sexual ornaments. Evolution 48:853–867CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Iwasa Y, Pomiankowski A (1999) Good parents and good genes models of handicap evolution. J Theor Biol 200:97–109PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Jensen H, Sæther B-E, Ringsby TH, Tufto J, Griffith SC, Ellegren H (2003) Sexual variation in heritability and genetic correlations of morphological traits in house sparrow Passer domesticus. J Evol Biol 16:1296–1307PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Jensen H, Sæther B-E, Ringsby TH, Tufto J, Griffith SC, Ellegren H (2004) Lifetime reproductive success in relation to morphology in the house sparrow Passer domesticus. J Anim Ecol 73:599–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Jensen H, Svorkmo-Lundberg T, Ringsby TH, Sæther B-E (2006) Environmental influence and cohort effects in a sexual ornament in the house sparrow, Passer domesticus. Oikos 114:212–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Jensen H, Steinsland I, Ringsby TH, Sæther B-E (2008) Evolutionary dynamics of a sexual ornament in the house sparrow (Passer domesticus): the role of indirect selection within and between sexes. Evolution 61:1275–1293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kacelnik A, Cuthill I (1990) Central place foraging in starlings Sturnus vulgaris II. Food allocation to chicks. J Anim Ecol 59:655–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kodric-Brown A, Brown JH (1984) Truth in advertising: the kinds of traits favoured by sexual selection. Am Nat 124:309–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kohler A, Verburgt L, Nicolson SW (2006) Short-term energy regulation of whitebellied sunbirds (Nectarinia talatala): effects of food concentration on feeding frequency and duration. J Exp Biol 209:2880–2887PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kokko H, Jennions MD, Brooks R (2006) Unifying and testing models of sexual selection. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 37:43–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Krystofkova M, Exnerova A, Porkert J (2006) Parental foraging strategies and feeding nestlings in common redstart (Phoenicurus phoenicurus). Ornis Fennica 83:49–58Google Scholar
  51. Kuitunen M, Jäntti A, Suhonen J, Aho T (1996) Food availability and male’s role in parental care in double-brooded tree creepers Certhia familiaris. Ibis 138:638–643Google Scholar
  52. Lack D (1966) Population studies of birds. Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  53. Lande R, Arnold SJ (1983) The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 37:1210–1226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lewis S, Wanless S, Elstono DA, David A, Schultz MD, Mackley E, Du Toit M, Underhill JG, Jenny G, Harris MP (2006) Determinants of quality in a long-lived colonial species. J Anim Ecol 75:1304–1312PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Lorentsen S-H (1995) Reproductive effort in the Antarctic petrel Thalassoica antarctica; the effect of parental body size and condition. PhD thesis. University of Trondheim, TrondheimGoogle Scholar
  56. Lorentsen S-H (1996) Regulation of food provision in the Antarctic petrel Thalassoica antarctica. J Anim Ecol 65:381–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. MacColl ADC, Hatchwell BJ (2003) Sharing of caring: nestling provisioning behaviour of long tailed tit: Aegithalos caudatus, parents and helpers. Anim Behav 66:955–964CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Mills JA (1989) Red-billed gull. In: Newton I (ed) Lifetime reproduction in birds. Academic Press, London, pp 387–404Google Scholar
  59. Møller AP (1987a) Social control of deception among status signalling house sparrows Passer domesticus. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 20:307–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Møller AP (1987b) Variation in badge size in male house sparrows Passer domesticus: evidence for status signalling. Anim Behav 35:1637–1644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Møller AP (1988) Badge size in the house sparrows Passer domesticus. Effects of intra- and intersexual selection. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 22:373–378Google Scholar
  62. Møller AP (1989) Natural and sexual selection on a plumage signal of status and on morphology in house sparrows, Passer domesticus. J Evol Biol 2:125–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Møller AP (1990) Sexual behaviour is related to badge size in the house sparrow Passer domesticus. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 27:23–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Møller AP, Erritzøe J (1992) Acquisition of breeding colorations depends on badge size in male House sparrows Passer domesticus. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 31:271–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Moreau RE (1947) Relations between number in birds, feeding rate and nestling period in nine species of birds in Tanganyika Territory. J Anim Ecol 16:205–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Naef-Daenzer B, Keller LF (1999) The foraging performance of great and blue tits Parus major and P. caeruleus in relation to caterpillar development, and its consequences for nestling growth and fledging weight. J Anim Ecol 68:708–718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Nakagawa S, Gillespie DOS, Hatchwell BJ, Burke T (2007) Predictable males and unpredictable females: sex difference in repeatability of parental care in a wild bird population. J Evol Biol 20:1674–1681PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Nolan PM, Stoehr AM, Hill GE, McGraw KJ (2001) The number of provisioning visits by house finches predicts the mass of food delivered. Condor 103:851–855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. O’Dwyer TW, Buttemer WA, Priddel DM, Downing JA (2006) Prolactin, body condition and the cost of good parenting: an interyear study in a long-lived seabird, Gould’s petrel (Pterodroma leucoptera). Funct Ecol 20:806–811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Perrins CM, Moss D (1975) Reproductive rates in the great tit. J Anim Ecol 44:695–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Pinkowski BC (1978) Feeding of nestling and fledgling Eastern Bluebirds. Wilson Bull 90:84–98Google Scholar
  72. R Development Core Team (2007). R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  73. Ringsby TH, Sæther B-E, Solberg EJ (1998) Size-dependent juvenile survival in house sparrows (Passer domesticus). J Avian Biol 29:241–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Ringsby TH, Sæther B-E, Altwegg R, Solberg EJ (1999) Temporal and spatial variation in survival rates of a house sparrow, Passer domesticus, metapopulation. Oikos 85:419–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Ringsby TH, Sæther B-E, Tufto J, Jensen H, Solberg EJ (2002) Asynchronous spatiotemporal demography of a house sparrow metapopulation in a correlated environment. Ecology 83:561–569Google Scholar
  76. Rowe L, Houle D (1996) The lek paradox and the capture of genetic variance by condition dependent traits. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 263:1415–1421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Royama T (1966) Factors governing feeding rate, food requirement and brood size of nestling great tit Parus major. Ibis 108:307–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Sæther B-E, Andersen R, Pedersen HC (1993) Regulation of parental effort in a long-lived seabird: an experimental study of the Antarctic petrel Thalassoica antarctica. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 33:147–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Sæther B-E, Ringsby TH, Bakke Ø, Solberg EJ (1999) Spatial and temporal variation in demography of a house sparrow metapopulation. J Anim Ecol 68:628–637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Schlüter D, Price T (1993) Honesty, perception and population divergence in sexually selected traits. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 253:117–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Schwagmeyer PL, Mock DW (2003) How consistently are good parents? Repeatability of parental care in the house sparrow, Passer domesticus. Ethology 109:303–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Siikamäki P (1998) Limitation of reproductive success by food availability and breeding time in pied flycatchers. Ecology 79:1789–1796Google Scholar
  83. Solberg EJ, Ringsby TH (1997) Does male badge size signal status in small island populations of house sparrows, Passer domesticus? Ethology 103:177–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Summers-Smith JD (1988) The sparrows. Poyser, StaffordshireGoogle Scholar
  85. Svensson L (1992) Identification guide to European passerines. L. Svensson, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  86. Tinbergen J (1981) Foraging decisions in starlings (Sturnus vulgaris). Ardea 69:1–67Google Scholar
  87. Trivers RL (1972) Parental investment and sexual selection. In: Campbell B (ed) Sexual selection and the decent of man. Aldine, Chicago, pp 136–179Google Scholar
  88. Tveraa T, Christensen GN (2002) Body condition and parental decisions in the snow petrel (Pagodroma nivea). Auk 119:266–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Vaclav R, Hoi H (2002) Different reproductive tactics in house sparrows signalled by badge size: is there a benefit to being average? Ethology 108:569–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. van Balen JH (1973) A comparative study of the breeding ecology of the great tit Parus major in different habitats. Ardea 61:1–93Google Scholar
  91. Varpe O, Tveraa T, Folstad I (2004) State-dependent parental care in the Antarctic petrel: responses to manipulated chick age during early chick rearing. Oikos 106:479–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Veiga JP (1993) Badge size, phenotypic quality, and reproductive success in the house sparrow: a study on honest advertisement. Evolution 47:1161–1170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Veiga JP (1995) Honest signalling and survival cost of badges in the house sparrow. Evolution 49:570–572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Veiga JP (1996) Permanent exposure versus facultative concealment of sexual traits: an experimental study in the house sparrow. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 39:345–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Veiga JP, Puerta M (1996) Nutritional constraints determine the expression of a sexual trait in the house sparrow, Passer domesticus. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 263:229–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Visser ME, Both C, Lambrechts MM (2004) Global climate change leads to mistimed avian reproduction. Birds and climate change. Adv Ecol Res 35:89–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Voltura KM, Schwagmeyer PL, Mock DW (2002) Parental feeding rates in the house sparrow, Passer domesticus: are larger-badged males better fathers? Ethology 108:1011–1022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. von HaartmanL L (1969) The nesting habits of Finnish birds I Passeriformes Societas Scientiarum Fennica. Commentationes Biol 32:1–187Google Scholar
  99. Weimerskirch H, Chastel O, Ackermann L (1995) Adjustment of parental effort to manipulated foraging ability in a pelagic seabird, the thin-billed prion Pachyptila belcheri. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 36:11–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Wendeln H, Becker PH (1999) Effects of parental quality and effort on the reproduction of common terns. J Anim Ecol 68:205–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Zahavi A (1975) Mate selection—a selection for a handicap. J Theor Biol 53:205–214PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Zahavi A (1977) The cost of honesty further remarks on the handicap principle. J Theor Biol 67:603–605PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Dt. Ornithologen-Gesellschaft e.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thor H. Ringsby
    • 1
  • Torborg Berge
    • 1
  • Bernt-Erik Saether
    • 1
  • Henrik Jensen
    • 1
  1. 1.Norwegian University for Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations