IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v18y2007i4p730-735.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Extreme gender-based post-fledging brood division in the toc-toc

Author

Listed:
  • Luciana B. Vega
  • Graham J. Holloway
  • James E. Millett
  • David S. Richardson

Abstract

The possibility that parents of one sex may preferentially invest in offspring of a certain sex raises profound evolutionary questions about the relative worth of sons and daughters to their mothers and fathers. Post-fledging brood division--in which each parent feeds a different subset of offspring--has been well documented in birds. However, a lack of empirical evidence that this may be based on offspring sex, combined with the theoretical difficulty of explaining such an interaction, has led researchers to consider a gender bias in post-fledging brood division highly unlikely. Here we show that in the toc-toc, Foudia sechellarum, post-fledging brood division is extreme and determined by sex; where brood composition allows, male parents exclusively provision male fledglings, whereas female parents provision female fledglings. This is the first study to provide unambiguous evidence, based on molecular sexing, that sex-biased post-fledging brood division can occur in birds. Male and female parents provisioned at the same rate and neither offspring nor parent survival appeared to be affected by the sex of the parent or offspring, respectively. The current hypotheses predicting advantages for brood division and preferential care for one specific type of offspring are discussed in the light of our results. Copyright 2007, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Luciana B. Vega & Graham J. Holloway & James E. Millett & David S. Richardson, 2007. "Extreme gender-based post-fledging brood division in the toc-toc," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 18(4), pages 730-735.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:18:y:2007:i:4:p:730-735
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arm038
    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:18:y:2007:i:4:p:730-735. 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.