Journal of Ornithology

, Volume 158, Issue 2, pp 517–532 | Cite as

Reproductive advantages of multiple female ornaments in the Asian Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica gutturalis

  • Masaru HasegawaEmail author
  • Emi Arai
  • Mamoru Watanabe
  • Masahiko Nakamura
Original Article


Recent research has increasingly focused on female ornamentation, with several studies having investigated female ornaments in relation to reproduction. However, most previous studies have focused on single female ornaments, while females of numerous species, particularly birds, possess multiple ornaments. It is still unclear whether multiple female ornaments are linked to reproductive performance, though this information is crucial for understanding how these ornaments have been maintained. In this study, we examined the signaling function of multiple female ornaments in the Asian Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica gutturalis in Japan. First, females with previous breeding experience in the study population had longer tails and more colorful throat patches than other females. This indicates that these ornaments can provide information about the breeding experience of females to conspecifics. In contrast to males, the size of white tail spots was not significantly related to breeding experience in females, partly because females with larger white spots were less likely to return to breed after a failed clutch. Second, females with longer tails and more colorful throats started breeding earlier than others, even after controlling for confounding factors, and they paired with attractive males (thereby obtaining their direct and indirect benefits too), suggesting a mating advantage for females with such ornaments. In addition, males paired with long-tailed females invested more in paternal care. These observed patterns differed from those of males, for whom the throat coloration and the size of white tail spots, rather than tail length, were significant predictors. In fact, a sex-combined analysis of breeding date demonstrated significant interactions of sex in relation to tail length and the size of white tail spots, indicating differential selection between the sexes. Our data suggest that selection on females may facilitate the evolution and maintenance of some female ornaments, partially independently of male ornaments.


Multiple ornaments Plumage coloration Quality indicator Sexual selection 


Fortpflanzungsvorteile multipler weiblicher Ornamente bei der asiatischen Unterart der Rauchschwalbe ( Hirundo rustica gutturalis )

In letzter Zeit hat sich die Forschung zunehmend auf Ornamentierung bei Weibchen konzentriert, und mehrere Studien haben weibliche Ornamente in Bezug auf die Fortpflanzung untersucht. Die meisten vorherigen Studien haben sich jedoch auf einzelne Weibchenornamente konzentriert, während die Weibchen vieler Arten, insbesondere bei Vögeln, mehrere Ornamente besitzen. Nach wie vor ist unklar, ob multiple Weibchenornamente mit der Fortpflanzungsleistung in Verbindung stehen, obwohl diese Information entscheidend ist, um zu verstehen, wie diese Ornamente aufrechterhalten worden sind. In dieser Studie haben wir die Signalfunktion multipler Weibchenornamente bei der asiatischen Unterart der Rauchschwalbe (Hirundo rustica gutturalis) in Japan untersucht. Erstens hatten Weibchen mit vorheriger Bruterfahrung im Untersuchungsgebiet längere Schwänze und buntere Kehlflecken als andere Weibchen. Dies deutet darauf hin, dass die Ornamente Artgenossen über die Bruterfahrung von Weibchen informieren können. Anders als bei Männchen hing die Größe der weißen Schwanzflecken bei Weibchen nicht mit der Bruterfahrung zusammen, z.T. weil Weibchen mit größeren weißen Flecken nach einer erfolglosen Brut mit geringerer Wahrscheinlichkeit zum Brüten zurückkehrten. Zweitens begannen Weibchen mit längeren Schwänzen und bunteren Kehlflecken früher mit der Brut als andere, selbst wenn die statistische Analyse Störfaktoren berücksichtigte. Zudem waren diese Weibchen mit attraktiven Männchen verpaart (und erlangten auf diese Weise auch noch direkte und indirekte Fitnessvorteile), was darauf hindeutet, dass Weibchen mit solchen Ornamenten einen Paarungsvorteil besitzen. Des Weiteren investierten Männchen, die mit langschwänzigen Weibchen verpaart waren, mehr in die Brutpflege. Diese beobachteten Muster unterschieden sich von denen für Männchen, bei denen die Kehlfärbung und die Größe der weißen Schwanzflecken (und nicht die Schwanzlänge) als signifikante erklärende Variablen fungierten. In der Tat zeigte eine beide Geschlechter berücksichtigende Analyse des Brutdatums signifikante Interaktionen von Geschlecht in Bezug auf Schwanzlänge und Größe der weißen Schwanzflecken, was auf unterschiedliche Selektionsdrücke bei den Geschlechtern hindeutet. Unsere Daten lassen darauf schließen, dass auf Weibchen wirkender Selektionsdruck die Evolution und Aufrechterhaltung einiger Weibchenornamente fördern könnte, und zwar z.T. unabhängig von männlichen Ornamenten.



We are grateful to the residents of Joetsu city for their kind support and assistance. We also thank the members of the Laboratory of Animal Ecology of Joetsu University of Education, and the Laboratory of Conservation Ecology of the University of Tsukuba, and anonymous referees. M. H. was supported by a Research Fellowship of the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (15J10000).

Supplementary material

10336_2016_1401_MOESM1_ESM.docx (81 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 81 kb)


  1. Amundsen T, Pärn H (2006) Female coloration: review of functional and nonfunctional hypotheses. In: Hill GE, McGraw KJ (eds) Bird coloration, vol II. Function and evolution. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  2. Arai E, Hasegawa M, Nakamura M (2009) Divorce and asynchronous arrival in Barn Swallows Hirundo rustica. Bird Study 56:411–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arai E, Hasegawa M, Nakamura M, Wakamatsu K (2015) Male pheomelanin pigmentation and the breeding onset in Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica gutturalis. J Ornithol 156:419–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arnqvist G, Rowe L, Krupa JJ, Sih A (1996) Assortative mating by size: a meta-analysis of mating patterns in water striders. Evol Ecol 10:265–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Balbontín J, Hermosell IG, Marzal A, Reviriego M, de Lope F, Møller AP (2007) Age-related change in breeding performance in early life is associated with an increase in competence in the migratory Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica. J Anim Ecol 76:915–925CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bennett KF, Ellison AM (2009) Nectar, not colour, may lure insects to their death. Biol Lett 5:469–472CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Bradley RJ, Hubbard JK, Jenkins BR, Safran RJ (2014) Patterns and ecological predictors of age-related performance in female North American Barn Swallows, Hirundo rustica erythrogaster. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 68:1883–1892CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burley N (1986) Sexual selection for aesthetic traits in species with biparental care. Am Nat 127:415–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clutton-Brock T (2009) Sexual selection in females. Anim Behav 77:3–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cramp S (1988) The birds of the western Palearctic, vol 5. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  11. Cuervo JJ, de Lope F, Møller AP (1996) The function of long tails in female Barn Swallows (Hirundo rustica): an experimental study. Behav Ecol 7:132–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cuervo JJ, Møller AP, de Lope F (2003) Experimental manipulation of tail length in female Barn Swallows (Hirundo rustica) affects their future reproductive success. Behav Ecol 14:451–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dale J, Dey CJ, Delhey K, Kempenaers B, Valcu M (2015) The effects of life history and sexual selection on male and female plumage colouration. Nature 527:367–370CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Dreiss AN, Antoniazza S, Burri R, Fumagalli L, Sonnay C, Frey C, Goudet J, Roulin A (2011) Local adaptation and matching habitat choice in female Barn Owls with respect to melanic coloration. J Evol Biol 25:103–114CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Foley JD, van Dam A (1984) Intensity and color. In: Foley JD, van Dam A (eds) Fundamentals of interactive computer graphics. Addison-Wesley, PhilippinesGoogle Scholar
  16. Forstmeier W, Schielzeth H (2011) Cryptic multiple hypotheses testing in linear models: overestimated effect sizes and the winner’s curse. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 65:47–55CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Fujita G (1993) Nest site selection and reproductive success in Barn Swallows—preliminary report. Strix 12:35–39 (Japanese with English summary) Google Scholar
  18. Garamszegi LZ, Heylen D, Møller AP, Eens M, de Lope F (2005) Age-dependent health status and song characteristics in the Barn Swallow. Behav Ecol 16:580–591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gelman A, Hill J (2007) Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Griffith SC, Pryke SR (2006) Benefits to females of assessing color displays. In: Hill GE, McGraw KJ (eds) Bird coloration, vol II. Function and evolution. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  21. Grüebler MU, Naef-Daenzer B (2010) Fitness consequences of timing of breeding in birds: data effects in the course of a reproductive episode. J Avian Biol 41:282–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Härdling R, Kokko H (2005) The evolution of prudent choice. Evol Ecol Res 7:697–715Google Scholar
  23. Hasegawa M (2005) Nihonno tsubame ni okeru seisentaku keisitu. M.D. thesis, University of Tsukuba (in Japanese) Google Scholar
  24. Hasegawa M (2011) Sexual selection on multiple ornaments in the Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica gutturalis. Ph.D. thesis, University of TsukubaGoogle Scholar
  25. Hasegawa M, Arai E (2013a) Divergent tail and throat ornamentation in the Barn Swallow across the Japanese islands. J Ethol 31:79–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hasegawa M, Arai E (2013b) Differential female access to males with large throat patches in the Asian Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica gutturalis. Zool Sci 30:913–918CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Hasegawa M, Arai E, Watanabe M, Nakamura M (2008) Methods for correcting plumage color fading in the Barn Swallow. Ornithol Sci 7:117–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hasegawa M, Arai E, Watanabe M, Nakamura M (2010a) Mating advantage of multiple male ornaments in the Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica gutturalis. Ornithol Sci 9:141–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hasegawa M, Arai E, Kojima W, Kitamura W, Fujita G, Higuchi H, Watanabe M, Nakamura M (2010b) Low level of extra-pair paternity in a population of the Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica gutturalis. Ornithol Sci 9:161–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hasegawa M, Arai E, Watanabe M, Nakamura M (2012a) High incubation investment of females paired to attractive males in Barn Swallows. Ornithol Sci 11:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hasegawa M, Arai E, Watanabe M, Nakamura M (2012b) Female mate choice based on territory quality in Barn Swallows. J Ethol 30:143–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hasegawa M, Arai E, Watanabe M, Nakamura M (2014a) Colourful males hold high quality territories but reduce paternal care in Barn Swallows. Behaviour 151:591–612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hasegawa M, Ligon RA, Giraudeau M, Watanabe M, McGraw KJ (2014b) Urban and colorful male house finches are less aggressive. Behav Ecol 25:641–649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hasegawa M, Watanabe M, Nakamura M (2016a) Promiscuous copulation attempts and discriminate pairing displays in male Barn Swallows as revealed by model presentation. Ethol Ecol Evol 28:163–174Google Scholar
  35. Hasegawa M, Arai E, Kutsukake N (2016b) Evolution of tail fork depth in genus Hirundo. Ecol Evol 6:851–858CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. Hill GE (1993) Male mate choice and the evolution of female plumage coloration in the house finch. Evolution 47:1515–1525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Jawor JM, Breitwisch R (2003) A unique ornament display in female northern cardinals. Wilson Bull 115:464–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Jawor JM, Linville SU, Beall SM, Breitwisch R (2003) Assortative mating by multiple ornaments in Northern Cardinals (Cardinalis cardinalis). Behav Ecol 14:515–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Jiang Y, Bolnick DI, Kirkpatrick M (2013) Assortative mating in animals. Am Nat 181:E125–E138CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Kojima W, Kitamura W, Kitajima S, Ito Y, Ueda K, Fujita G, Higuchi H (2009) Female Barn Swallows gain indirect but not direct benefits through social mate choice. Ethology 115:939–947CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kokko H (1997) Evolutionarily stable strategies of age-dependent sexual advertisement. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 41:99–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kokko H, Brooks R, McNamara JM, Houston AI (2002) The sexual selection continuum. Proc R Soc Lond B 269:1333–1340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kose M, Møller AP (1999) Sexual selection, feather breakage and parasites: the importance of white spots in the tail of the Barn Swallow. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 45:430–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kose M, Mänd R, Møller AP (1999) Sexual selection for white tail spots in the Barn Swallow in relation to habitat choice by feather lice. Anim Behav 58:1201–1205CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Kraaijeveld K, Kraaijeveld-Smit FJL, Komdeur J (2007) The evolution of mutual ornamentation. Anim Behav 74:657–677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lande R (1980) Sexual dimorphism, sexual selection, and adaptation in polygenic characters. Evolution 34:292–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lessells CM, Boag PT (1987) Unrepeatable repeatabilities: a common mistake. Auk 104:116–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lifjeld JT, Kleven O, Jacobesen F, McGraw KJ, Safran RJ, Robertson RJ (2011) Age before beauty? Relationships between fertilization success and age-dependent ornaments in Barn Swallows. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 65:1687–1697CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. Ministry of Environment (1997) Accessed 6 Mar 2016
  50. Møller AP (1982) Clutch size in relation to nest size in the Swallow Hirundo rustica. Ibis 124:339–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Møller AP (1987) Advantages and disadvantages of coloniality in the Swallow, Hirundo rustica. Anim Behav 35:819–832CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Møller AP (1988) Female choice selects for male sexual tail ornaments in the monogamous Swallow. Nature 332:640–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Møller AP (1993) Sexual selection in the Barn Swallow (Hirundo rustica). III. Female tail ornaments. Evolution 47:417–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Møller AP (1994) Sexual selection and the Barn Swallow. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  55. Møller AP, de Lope F (1999) Senescence in a short-lived migratory bird: age-dependent morphology, migration, reproduction and parasitism. J Anim Ecol 68:163–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Møller AP, Pomiankowski A (1993) Why have birds got multiple sexual ornaments? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 32:167–176Google Scholar
  57. Møller AP, Szép T (2005) Rapid evolutionary change in a secondary sexual character linked to climatic change. J Evol Biol 18:481–495CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Møller AP, Thornhill R (1998) Male parental care, differential parental investment by females and sexual selection. Anim Behav 55:1507–1515CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Møller AP, Chabi Y, Cuervo JJ, de Lope F, Kilpimaa J, Kose M, Matyjasiak P, Pap PJ, Saino N, Sakraoui R, Schifferli L, von Hirschheydt J (2006) An analysis of continent-wide patterns of sexual selection in a passerine bird. Evolution 60:856–868CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Montgomerie R (2006) Analyzing colors. In: Hill GE, McGraw KJ (eds) Bird coloration, vol I. Mechanisms and measurements. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  61. Nakagawa S, Cuthill IC (2007) Effect size, confidence interval and statistical effect size, confidence interval and statistical significance: a practical guide for biologists. Biol Rev 82:591–605CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Ninni P (2003) Carotenoid signals in Barn Swallows. Ph.D. thesis, Université Pierre et Marie CurieGoogle Scholar
  63. Norberg RA (1994) Swallow tail streamer is a mechanical device for self deflection of tail leading edge, enhancing aerodynamic efficiency and flight manoeuvrability. Proc R Soc Lond B 257:227–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Odom KJ, Hall ML, Riebel K, Omland KE, Langmore NE (2014) Female song is widespread and ancestral in songbirds. Nat Commun 5:3379. doi: 10.1038/ncomms4379 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Peig J, Green AJ (2009) New perspectives for estimating body condition from mass/length data: the scaled mass index as an alternative method. Oikos 118:1883–1891CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. R Development Core Team (2011) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. ISBN 3-900051-07-0. Accessed 6 Mar 2016
  67. Ringhorfer M, Hasegawa T (2014) Social cues are preferred over resource cues for breeding-site selection in Barn Swallows. J Ornithol 155:531–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Roulin A (1999) Nonrandom pairing by male Barn Owls Tyto alba with respect to a female plumage trait. Behav Ecol 10:688–695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Roulin A, Altwegg R (2007) Breeding rate is associated with pheomelanism in male and with eumelanism in female Barn Owls. Behav Ecol 18:563–570CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Roulin A, Riols C, Dijkstra C, Ducrest A-L (2001a) Female- and male-specific signals of quality in the Barn Owl. J Evol Biol 14:255–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Roulin A, Riols C, Dijkstra C, Ducrest A-L (2001b) Female plumage spottiness and parasite resistance in the Barn Owl (Tyto alba). Behav Ecol 12:103–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Ruxton GD (2006) The unequal variance t-test is an underused alternative to Student’s t-test and the Mann–Whitney U test. Behav Ecol 17:688–690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Safran RJ, McGraw KJ (2004) Plumage coloration, not length or symmetry of tail-streamers, is a sexually selected trait in North American Barn Swallows. Behav Ecol 15:455–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Saino N, Ambrosini R, Martinelli R, Møller AP (2002) Mate fidelity, senescence in breeding performance and reproductive trade-offs in the Barn Swallow. J Anim Ecol 71:309–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Saino N, Romano M, Romano A, Rubolini D, Ambrosini R, Caprioli M, Parolini M, Scandolara C, Bazzi G, Constanzo A (2015) White tail spots in breeding Barn Swallows Hirundo rustica signal body condition during winter moult. Ibis 157:722–730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Schluter D, Price T (1993) Honesty, perception and population divergence in sexually selected traits. Proc R Soc Lond B 253:117–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Scordato ESA, Safran RJ (2014) Geographic variation in sexual selection and implications for speciation in the Barn Swallow. Avian Res 5:8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Sheldon BC (2000) Differential allocation: tests, mechanisms and implications. Trends Ecol Evol 15:397–402CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. Shields WM (1984) Factors affecting nest and site fidelity in Adirondack Barn Swallows (Hirundo rustica). Auk 101:780–789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Siefferman L, Hill GE (2005) Evidence for sexual selection on structural plumage coloration in female Eastern Bluebirds (Sialia sialis). Evolution 59:1819–1828CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. Soler JJ, Cuervo JJ, Møller AP, de Lope F (1998) Nest building is asexually selected behaviour in the Barn Swallow. Anim Behav 56:1435–1442CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Suzuki H (1998) The breeding status of the Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica at Yahata River mouth Hiroshima. Strix 16:99–108 (in Japanese with English summary) Google Scholar
  83. Tajima K, Nakamura M (2003) Response to manipulation of partner contribution: a handicapping experiment in the Barn Swallow. Ornithol Sci 2:65–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Tazzyman SJ, Iwasa Y, Pomiankowski A (2014) Signaling efficacy drives the evolution of larger sexual ornaments by sexual selection. Evolution 68:216–229CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. Tobias JA, Montgomerie RD, Lyon BE (2012) The evolution of female ornaments and weaponry: social selection, sexual selection and ecological competition. Philos Trans R Soc B 367:2274–2293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Turner AK (2006) The Barn Swallow. Poyser, LondonGoogle Scholar
  87. van Doorn GS, Weissing FJ (2004) The evolution of female preferences for multiple indicators of quality. Am Nat 164:173–186CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. Vortman Y, Lotem A, Dor R, Lovette IJ, Safran RJ (2011) The sexual signals of the East-Mediterranean Barn Swallow: a different Swallow tale. Behav Ecol 22:1344–1352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Vortman Y, Lotem A, Dor R, Lovette I, Safran RJ (2013) Multiple sexual signals and behavioral reproductive isolation in a diverging population. Am Nat 182:514–523CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. Vortman Y, Safran RJ, Reiner Brodetzki T, Dor R, Lotem A (2015) Expression of multiple sexual signals by fathers and sons in the East-Mediterranean Barn Swallow: are advertising strategies heritable? PLoS One 10:e0118054. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118054 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  91. Voss MA, Rutter MA, Zimmerman NG, Moll KM (2008) Adaptive value of thermally inefficient male incubation in Barn Swallows (Hirundo rustica). Auk 125:637–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Whittingham MJ, Stephens PA, Bradbury RB, Freckleton RP (2006) Why do we still use stepwise modelling in ecology and behaviour? J Anim Ecol 75:1182–1189CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. Wilkins MR, Shizuka D, Joseph MB, Hubbard HK, Safran RJ (2015) Multimodal signalling in the North American Barn Swallow: a phenotype network approach. Proc R Soc Lond B 282:20151574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Yabusaki K, Faits T, McMullen E, Figueiredo JL, Aikawa M, Aikawa E (2014) A novel quantitative approach for eliminating sample-to-sample variation using a hue saturation value analysis software. PLoS One 9:e89627. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0089627 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Dt. Ornithologen-Gesellschaft e.V. 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Masaru Hasegawa
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  • Emi Arai
    • 2
  • Mamoru Watanabe
    • 1
  • Masahiko Nakamura
    • 2
  1. 1.Graduate School of Life and Environmental SciencesUniversity of TsukubaTsukuba-shiJapan
  2. 2.Laboratory of Animal Ecology, Department of BiologyJoetsu University of EducationJoetsu-shiJapan
  3. 3.Department of Evolutionary Studies of BiosystemsSokendai (The Graduate University for Advanced Studies)Hayama-machiJapan

Personalised recommendations