Mate-feeding has evolved as a compensatory energetic strategy that affects breeding success in birds
In many animals, females are fed by males during courtship or incubation (mate-feeding). According to the mate appraisal hypothesis, females may evaluate the parental capacity of males, whereas the pair bond hypothesis suggests that feeding may strengthen the pair bonds with them. Following the nutrition hypothesis, by contrast, females obtain direct nutritional benefits from being fed by males during periods of high-energy expenditure, such as egg formation and incubation. However, there is little support for these hypotheses at an interspecific level. We tested predictions from these hypotheses in a dataset of 170 species of passerine birds. As predicted by the nutrition hypothesis, we found that mate-feeding has evolved more often in species in which the female incubates and builds the nest alone and have noncarnivorous diets. This suggests that mate-feeding is a behavioral strategy that compensates for nutritional limitations of females during breeding, as both incubation and nest building are energetically costly processes, and noncarnivorous diets are deficient in proteins. We also found that incubation feeding has evolved more often in species that place nests at elevated sites, suggesting that these species face low predation risk that allows males to feed females. In the particular case of incubation feeding, we found that species that have evolved this behavior produce larger clutch size and have higher hatching success. Our results support the nutrition hypothesis from an interspecific perspective, suggesting that mate-feeding is a strategy to compensate for nutritional limitations of females during reproduction and that it has fitness consequences. Copyright 2011, Oxford University Press.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 22 (2011)
Issue (Month): 5 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK|
Fax: 01865 267 985
Web page: http://beheco.oxfordjournals.org/
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.oup.co.uk/journals|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:22:y:2011:i:5:p:1088-1095. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press)or (Christopher F. Baum)
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.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.