- Letter
- Published:
Viability costs of male tail ornaments in a swallow
Naturevolume 339, pages132–135 (1989)Cite this article
549Accesses
161Citations
6Altmetric
Abstract
MALE sexual ornaments that increase mating success may evolve even when they decrease other components of fitness such as survival1–9. But natural covariation between the apparent level of investment in such ornaments and fitness components such as mating success, fecundity and survival, does not provide incontrovertible evidence that the ornaments are costly, because uncontrolled variables such as overall health5 may affect several components of fitness at the same time10–12. By experimental manipulation of male tail length in the monogamous swallow,Hirundo rustica, however, the effects of tail endorment can be tested directly. I show here that in such experiments, females prefer males with elongated tails over those with shortened tails13, but that males with experimentally elongated tail ornaments captured smaller, less profitable prey than those with shortened tails. Impaired foraging efficiency of tail-elongated males increased the frequency of fault bars in their tail feathers, probably as a result of food deficiency during moult. Males with experimentally elongated tail ornaments also decreased their natural tail size during moult, thereby causing a fitness loss in terms of delayed breeding and a reduced annual production of offspring resulting from reduced sexual attractiveness during the following year.
This is a preview of subscription content,access via your institution
Access options
Subscription info for Japanese customers
We have a dedicated website for our Japanese customers. Please go tonatureasia.com to subscribe to this journal.
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
Testing the morphological constraint hypothesis of tail length in the sexually dimorphicCerastes vipera and new perspectives
References
Fisher, R. A.The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection 2nd edn (Dover, New York, 1958).
Lande, R.Proc. natn. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.79, 3721–3725 (1981).
Kirkpatrick, M.Evolution36, 1–12 (1982).
Andersson, M.Biol. J. Linn. Soc.17, 375–393 (1982).
Andersson, M.Evolution40, 804–816 (1986).
Hamilton, W. O. & Zuk, M.Science218, 384–387 (1982).
Partridge, L. & Endler, J. A. inSexual Selection: Testing the Alternatives (eds Bradbury, J. W. & Andersson, M. B.) 265–277 (Wiley, Chichester, 1987).
Pomiankowski, A.Oxford Surv. Evol. Biol.5, 136–184 (1988).
Seger, J.Evolution39, 1185–1193 (1985).
Partridge, L. & Harvey, P. H.Nature316, 20–21 (1985).
Reznick, D.Oikos44, 257–267 (1985).
Bell, G. & Koufopanou, V.Oxford Surv. Evol. Biol.3, 83–131 (1985).
Møller, A. P.Nature332, 640–642 (1988).
Møller, A. P.Anim. Behav.35, 819–832 (1987).
Turner, A. K. thesis, Univ. Stirling (1980).
Turner, A. K.Anim. Behav.30, 862–872 (1982).
Waugh, D. R. thesis, Univ. Stirling (1978).
Orians, G. H. & Horn, H. S.Ecology50, 930–938 (1969).
Henry, C.Alauda50, 92–107 (1982).
Rogers, L. E., Hinds, W. T. & Buschbom, R. L.Ann. Ent. Soc. Am.69, 387–389 (1976).
Møller, A. P.Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol.17, 401–408 (1985).
Broekhuysen, G. J. & Brown, A. R.Ardea51, 25–43 (1963).
Mendelsohn, J.A. Transvaal Mus.28, 79–89 (1979).
Harrison, C. J. O. inA Dictionary of Birds (eds Campbell, B. & Lack, E.) 472–474 (Poyser, Calton, 1985).
Becker, W. A.Manual of Quantitative Genetics 4th edn (Academic Enterprises, Pullman, 1984).
Sokal, R. R. & Rohlf, F. J.Biometry. 2nd edn (Freeman, San Francisco, 1981).
Darwin, C.The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex (Murray, London, 1871).
O'Donald, P.Nature237, 349–351 (1972).
Møller, A. P.Anim. Behav. (in the press).
Kirkpatrick, M.Am. Nat.125, 788–810 (1985).
Kirkpatrick, M.Am. Nat.127, 222–240 (1986).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Department of Zoology, Uppsala University, Box 561, S-751 22, Uppsala, Sweden
Anders Pape Møller
- Anders Pape Møller
You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pape Møller, A. Viability costs of male tail ornaments in a swallow.Nature339, 132–135 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1038/339132a0
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
Share this article
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
