IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v14y2003i5p724-729.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Increased vigilance of paired males in sexually dimorphic species: distinguishing between alternative explanations in wintering Eurasian wigeon

Author

Listed:
  • Matthieu Guillemain
  • Richard W. G. Caldow
  • Kathy H. Hodder
  • John D. Goss-Custard

Abstract

In animal pairs, males are often more vigilant than females. This is generally assumed to result from mate guarding (either against predators or other males). However, when males have conspicuous secondary sexual characteristics, they could be constrained to be more vigilant because of a higher predation risk than females. We attempted to distinguish between the "male constraint hypothesis" and two variations of the mate-guarding hypothesis by studying the vigilance behavior of the sexually dimorphic wigeon during early winter, when some males are in breeding plumage and some are not and when not all males are paired. The proportion of time spent vigilant by paired males in breeding plumage was five times higher than any other category of males or females. We found no significant differences between the vigilance levels of unpaired male wigeon in cryptic and in breeding plumage and therefore rejected the male constraint hypothesis. As vigilance levels of paired and unpaired females did not differ either, we rejected the hypothesis that paired males invest in vigilance to reduce their mate's need to be vigilant to predation risks. Paired females interacted less frequently with other wigeon than unpaired ones, and it is probably to protect their female from other males that paired male wigeon increase their vigilance times. Copyright 2003.

Suggested Citation

  • Matthieu Guillemain & Richard W. G. Caldow & Kathy H. Hodder & John D. Goss-Custard, 2003. "Increased vigilance of paired males in sexually dimorphic species: distinguishing between alternative explanations in wintering Eurasian wigeon," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 14(5), pages 724-729, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:14:y:2003:i:5:p:724-729
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arg060
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:14:y:2003:i:5:p:724-729. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.