Author
Listed:
- Iván Bizberg-Barraza
- Cristina Rodríguez
- Hugh Drummond
Abstract
Parental overproduction is hypothesized to hedge against uncertainty over food availability and stochastic death of offspring and to improve brood fitness. Understanding the evolution of overproduction requires quantifying its benefits to parents across a wide range of ecological conditions, which has rarely been done. Using a multiple hypotheses approach and 30 years of data, we evaluated the benefits of overproduction in the Blue-footed booby, a seabird that lays up to three eggs asynchronously, resulting in an aggressive brood hierarchy that facilitates the death of last-hatched chicks under low food abundance. Results support the resource-tracking hypothesis, as low prey abundance (estimated from sea surface temperature and chlorophyll-a concentration) led to rapid brood reduction. The insurance hypothesis was supported in broods of three, where last-hatched chicks’ survival increased after a sibling’s death. Conversely, in broods of two, results suggested that parents abandoned last-hatched chicks following first-hatched chicks’ deaths. No direct evidence supported the facilitation hypothesis: the presence of a last-hatched chick during development did not enhance its sibling’s fitness in the short or long term. The value of last-hatched offspring to parents, as “extra” or “insurance” varied with indices of food abundance, brood size, and parental age. Ninety percent of overproduction benefits came from enabling parents to capitalize on favorable conditions by fledging additional offspring. Our study provides insight into the forces driving overproduction, explaining the adaptiveness of this apparently wasteful behavior and allowing us to better predict how overproduction’s benefits might be modified by ocean warming.
Suggested Citation
Iván Bizberg-Barraza & Cristina Rodríguez & Hugh Drummond, 2024.
"Parental overproduction allows siblicidal bird to adjust brood size to climate-driven prey variation,"
Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 35(2), pages 264-273.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:beheco:v:35:y:2024:i:2:p:264-273.
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
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:35:y:2024:i:2:p:264-273.. 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.