Advertisement

Evolutionary Ecology

, Volume 26, Issue 4, pp 1041–1053 | Cite as

Secondary sex ratio covaries with demographic trends and ecological conditions in the barn swallow

  • Andrea Romano
  • Roberto Ambrosini
  • Manuela Caprioli
  • Andrea Bonisoli-Alquati
  • Nicola Saino
Original Paper

Abstract

Parents are expected to invest more in the sex that benefits most from the local environment. When the quality of breeding sites varies spatially and natal dispersal of males and females differs, parents in high-quality habitats should skew their progeny sex ratio in favor of the less dispersing sex. We tested this prediction in the barn swallow (Hirundo rustica L.), by relating the proportion of male offspring around fledging (secondary sex ratio) of first and second broods to the ecological quality (presence of livestock farming and relative surface of hayfields in the foraging range) and local demographic trends of the farms where the colonies were located. Consistent with our predictions, the proportion of male offspring, which are more philopatric than females, increased with the extent of hayfields, which are high quality, preferred foraging habitats. Moreover, the proportion of male offspring in second broods was smaller in colonies with positive demographic trends, possibly indicating density-dependent effects on sex ratio. Independent of the mechanism generating uneven sex ratio (zygote sex ratio adjustment or sex-related pre-fledging mortality), barn swallows breeding under favorable conditions overproduced the sex that is more likely to benefit from such conditions.

Keywords

Sex allocation Natal dispersal Demographic trend Habitat quality Julliard’s model 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to all farm owners that allowed us to perform this study in their cowsheds and houses. Paolo Bonvini, Matteo Bosetti, Valentina Mangoni, Davide Sala, Beatrice Sicurella, Enrico Steiner and Massimiliano Mori greatly helped during field works. We also thank the administration of the Parco Regionale Adda Sud for their logistic support. De Anna Estella Beasley kindly provided comments on a previous version of this manuscript, improving its readability.

References

  1. Ambrosini R, Saino N (2010) Environmental effects at two nested spatial scales on habitat choice and breeding performance of barn swallow. Evol Ecol 24:491–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ambrosini R, Bolzern AM, Canova L, Arieni S, Møller AP, Saino N (2002) The distribution and colony size of barn swallow in relation to agricultural land use. J Appl Ecol 39:524–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ambrosini R, Ferrari RP, Martinelli R, Romano M, Saino N (2006) Seasonal, meteorological, and microhabitat effects on breeding success and offspring phenotype in the barn swallow, Hirundo rustica. Ecoscience 13:298–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Badyaev AV, Hill GE, Beck ML, Dervan AA, Duckworth RA, McGraw KJ, Nolan PM, Whittingham LA (2002) Divergence in a passerine bird sex-biased hatching order and adaptive population. Science 295:316–318PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Balbontìn J, Møller AP, Hermosell IG, Marzal A, Reviriego M, de Lope F (2009) Geographic patterns of natal dispersal in barn swallows Hirundo rustica from Denmark and Spain. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63:1197–1205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. BirdLife International (2004) Birds in Europe: population estimates, trends and conservation status. BirdLife International, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  7. Boncoraglio G, Martinelli R, Saino N (2008) Sex-related asymmetry in competitive ability of sexually monomorphic barn swallow nestlings. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 62:729–738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bonisoli-Alquati A, Boncoraglio G, Caprioli C, Saino N (2011) Birth order, individual sex and sex of competitors determine the outcome of conflict among siblings over parental care. Proc R Soc Lond B 278:1273–1279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bradbury RR, Blakey JK (1998) Diet, maternal condition, and offspring sex ratio in the Zebra Finch Poephila guttata. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 265:895–899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cameron EZ (2004) Facultative adjustment of mammalian sex ratio in support of the Trivers-Willard hypothesis: evidence for a mechanism. Proc R Soc Lond B 271:1723–1728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cassey P, Ewen JG, Møller AP (2006) Revised evidence for facultative sex ratio adjustment in birds: a correction. Proc R Soc Lond B 273:3129–3130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Charnov EL (1982) The theory of sex allocation. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  13. Clark AB (1978) Sex ratio and local resource competition in a prosimian primate. Science 201:163–165PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Clutton-Brock TH, Albon SD, Guinness FE (1984) Maternal dominance, breeding success and birth sex-ratios in red deer. Nature 308:358–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Correa S, Adkins-Regan E, Johnson PA (2005) High progesterone during avian meiosis biases sex ratios toward females. Biol Lett 1:215–218PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ewen JG, Cassey P, Møller AP (2004) Facultative primary sex ratio variation: a lack of evidence in birds? Proc R Soc Lond B 271:1277–1282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ferrari RP, Martinelli R, Saino N (2006) Differential effect of egg albumen content on barn swallow nestlings in relation to hatch order. J Evol Biol 19:981–993PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fiala KL (1980) On estimating the primary sex ratio from incomplete data. Am Nat 115:442–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fisher RA (1930) The genetical theory of natural selection. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  20. Forero MG, Donazar JA, Hiraldo F (2002) Causes and fitness consequences of natal dispersal in a population of Black Kites. Ecology 83:858–872CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Frank SA (1990) Sex allocation theory for birds and mammals. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 21:13–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Godfray HC (1994) Parasitoids. Behavioural and evolutionary ecology. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  23. Gowaty PA (1993) Differential dispersal, local resource competition, and sex ratio variation in birds. Am Nat 141:263–280PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Greenwood PJ (1980) Mating systems, philopatry and dispersal in birds and mammals. Anim Behav 28:1140–1162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Greenwood PJ, Harvey PH (1982) The natal and breeding dispersal of birds. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 13:1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Griffiths R, Double MC, Orr K, Dawson RJG (1998) A DNA test to sex most birds. Molec Ecol 7:1071–1075CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Grüebler MU, Korner-Nievergelt F, Von Hirschheydt J (2010) The reproductive benefits of livestock farming in barn swallows Hirundo rustica: quality of nest site or foraging habitat? J Appl Ecol 47:1340–1347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hasselquist D, Kempenaers B (2002) Parental care and adaptative brood sex ratio manipulation in birds. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 357:363–372PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Julliard R (2000) Sex-specific dispersal in spatially varying environments leads to habitat-dependent evolutionary stable sex ratios. Behav Ecol 11:421–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kilner R (1998) Primary and secondary sex ratio manipulation by Zebra Finches. Anim Behav 56:155–164PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Komdeur J, Pen I (2002) Adaptative sex allocation in birds: the complexities of linking theory and practice. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 357:373–380PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Komdeur J, Daan S, Tinbergern J, Mateman AC (1997) Extreme adaptive modification in sex ratio of the Seychelles warbler’s eggs. Nature 385:522–526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Krackow S, Neuhäser M (2008) Insight from complete-incomplete brood sex ratio disparity. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 62:469–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lessells CM (1998) A theoretical framework for sex biased parental care. Anim Behav 56:395–407PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Martín CA, Alonso JC, Alonso JA, Palacín C, Magaña M, Martín B (2008) Natal dispersal in great bustards: the effect of sex, local population size and spatial isolation. J Anim Ecol 77:326–334PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Møller AP (1994) Sexual selection and the barn swallow. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  37. Møller AP (2001) The effect of dairy farming on barn swallow Hirundo rustica abundance, distribution and reproduction. J Appl Ecol 38:378–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Nager RG, Monaghan P, Griffiths R, Houston DC, Dawson R (1999) Experimental demonstration that offspring sex ratio varies with maternal condition. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96:570–573PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Nakagawa S (2004) A farewell to Bonferroni: the problems of low statistical power and publication bias. Behav Ecol 15:1044–1045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Oddie K (1998) Sex discrimination before birth. Trends Ecol Evol 13:130–131PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pusey AE (1987) Sex-biased dispersal and inbreeding avoidance in birds and mammals. Trends Ecol Evol 2:295–299PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pusey AE, Wolf M (1996) Inbreeding avoidance in animals. Trends Ecol Evol 11:201–206PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Saino N, Calza S, Ninni P, Møller AP (1999) Barn swallows trade survival against offspring condition and immunocompetence. J Anim Ecol 68:999–1009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Saino N, Ninni P, Incagli M, Calza S, Møller AP (2000) Begging and parental care in relation to offspring need and condition in the barn swallow (Hirundo rustica). Am Nat 156:637–649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Saino N, Ambrosini R, Martinelli R, Calza S, Møller AP, Pilastro A (2002) Offspring sexual dimorphism and sex-allocation in relation to parental age and paternal ornamentation in the barn swallow. Molec Ecol 11:1533–1544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Saino N, De Ayala RM, Boncoraglio G, Martinelli R (2008a) Male-biased brood sex ratio depresses average phenothypic quality of barn swallow nestlings under experimental harsh condition. Oecologia 156:441–453PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Saino N, Martinelli R, Romano M (2008b) Ecological and phenological covariates of offspring sex ratio in barn swallows. Evol Ecol 22:659–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Saino N, Romano M, Caprioli M, Ambrosini R, Rubolini D, Fasola M (2010) Sex allocation in yellow-legged gulls (Larus michahellis) depends on nutritional constraints on production of large last eggs. Proc R Soc Lond B 277:1203–1208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Silk JB (1984) Local resource competition and the evolution of male-biased sex ratios. J Theor Biol 108:203–213PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Trivers RL, Willard DE (1973) Natural selection of parental ability to vary sex ratio of offspring. Science 179:90–92PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Turner A (2006) The barn swallow. T & AD Poyser, LondonGoogle Scholar
  52. West SA, Sheldon BC (2002) Constraints in the evolution of sex ratio adjustment. Science 295:1685–1688PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Young RL, Badyaev AV (2004) Evolution of sex-biased maternal effects in birds: I. Sex specific resource allocation among simultaneously growing oocytes. J Evol Biol 17:1355–1366PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrea Romano
    • 1
  • Roberto Ambrosini
    • 2
  • Manuela Caprioli
    • 1
  • Andrea Bonisoli-Alquati
    • 1
  • Nicola Saino
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di BiologiaUniversità degli Studi di MilanoMilanItaly
  2. 2.Dipartimento di Biotecnologie e BioscienzeUniversità degli Studi di Milano-BicoccaMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations