Beta Fulltext view is in preview — article structure may vary. Browse all articles
Contents
International Journal of Zoology and Animal Biology Research Article 12 min read

Modern Evolutionary Biology: Some Concepts, Questions and Comments in Relation to Birds

Peiro IG*
* Corresponding author
ISSN: 2639-216X  10.23880/izab-16000369  Received: April 04, 2022  Published: April 11, 2022
 — views
 72 references
PDF
Keywords
Trivers-Willard Hipothesis Sex-Allocation Parental Investment Delayed Plumage Maturation Sexy-Sons Birds
Abstract

There are four principles in evolution: variation, inheritance, selection and time. These principles summarizes natural selection. In the same way, sexual selection can be defined as the evolution of certain conspicuous physical traits, such as pronounced coloration, increased size, or striking adornments that may grant the possessors of these traits greater success in obtaining mates. Both concepts join on time in the branch termed evolutionary biology (EB). Current EB since Darwin had a primer at the end of the past century in the Trivers-Wilard’s hypothesis based on the relationships of parents’ effort with the condition of offspring. This hypothesis has required new brands termed “Sex-allocation“, “Parental Investment”, “Delayed Maturation” and “Sexy-sons” to conform the framework of the current EB. Here, I try to summarize the key concepts of these theories trying to bring the theme towards birds.

Introduction

The primary force of EB is to self-ask why, but not how or for what [1, 2, 3, 4]. Sexual selection described by Darwin CR, et al. [5] is one of the main process in EB and involves two basic arguments: intra-sexual competition and mate choice. Both are crucial to understand the posterior advances in EB. The current EB is based four theories: Triver-Wilard’s hypothesis (THP), the sex-allocation theory (SA), the parental investment theory (PIT), the delayed matuation (DM) and the sexy-sons theory (SS). Here, I draw up a slight update of the major theories since Charles Darwin’s theories on natural [6] and sexual selection [7]. These are significantly settled up within the processes of the modern EB.

The Triver-Willard’s Hypothesis (THP)

One of the first paradigms of the EB was born in 1972 with Triver-Willard’s hypothesis [6]. Perhaps this idea keept the contemporary notions of EB from the ends of the early century from the works of natural and sexual selection written at the eighteen century described by Charles, et al. [5, 7]. THP relates parental effort with the son’s condition, in the form that mothers in good condition should invest in more sons than daughters. This implicates that sex-ratios in animal populations are generally biased towards males. This theory was not adopted in the Fisher’s Equal allocation Theory becouse is based in the fact that sex-ratios meet parity in the offspring [8, 9].

The Sex-Allocation Theory (SA)

THP is relative to the each sex number of offspring namely sex-ratio is variable and evolves towards the “Sex Allocation Theory” [10, 11] that is explained as the cost of reproduction, in terms of growth and survival and maintenance for future reproduction balanced against one sex. SA has been well explored in insects [12, 13, 14], fishes [15], reptilians [16, 17] , birds [18] and mammals [19, 20], but the main problem of SA is that there are biases in every one of the sex-ratios, this is, in primary (at embryo), secondary (at birth) and tertiary (at adult) sex-ratios that are not completely studied in the animal kingdom. In birds, for example, this has been partially treated as sex ratios in eggs (primary sex-ratios: [21, 22, 23]); sex ratios at nestlings (secondary sex-ratios: [24, 25, 26, 27]) at the population level (tertiary sex-ratios: [28]). However, experimental examples [29, 30, 31, 32] show that some birds may alter sex-ratios in response to parental quality in the described “Facultative sex ratios adjustment” [33].

The Parental Investment Theory (PIT)

THP evolves in to the “Parental Investment Theory” [34, 35, 36] when the amounts of energy devoted to offspring reveals that the less investing sex benefits more from seeking sexual parents while the more investing sex benefits more from strengthening its capability to support offspring [36]. In PIT females benefit from mating with an attractive male because attractiveness signals male genetic quality by sexual selection or by natural selection at higher age in individuals with maturation at longer age [8, 37, 38]. PIT has some experimental problems to alter fitness with condition in birds. Some empirical works identify a link between fitness and condition [39, 40, 41, 42, 43] but others not [44, 45, 46, 47]. Fitness is understood as the maturation of one sex that is more unfavorable for the other one (e.g. fitness as term applied to gonads, ornaments, etc: [8, 48, 49]). How animals make decisions with less costs on reproduction which are not involved in benefits that are not related with past reproductive effort implicates the need for future trade-offs between present and future reproduction. In adaptation and natural selection, George C. Williams linked the distinction between group and individual adaptation with the distinction between group and individual selection in the term “Williams’ Principle” [50] that says that adaptation at a level requires selection at that level. The contrary of these assumptions falls in the “Concorde Fallacy” [50].

The Delayed Maturation (DM) and the Delayed Plumage Maturation (DPM)

SA has direct effects in DM [51, 52] and similarly to PI. PI [51] explains that if for a given investment the probability of survival is lower for one sex, selection favours greater investment in that sex. If one sex has a frequency-dependent component of fitness, such that individuals receiving a greater-than-average investment are fitter, selection favours greater investment in that sex. DM specifically in birds [53] it refers to DPM known as the delayed acquisition of a definitive color and pattern of plumage until after the first potential breeding period. DM has profound implications in fecundity of birds [54] and in the age dependent offspring linked to condition since larger sexes mature less than smaller, and are less promiscuous and less abundant sexes and less mature smaller sexes have more probability to gain older age, more lifespan, and hence more probabilities to rear more pairs and to give more discordancy [37, 38]. DPM has multiple effects on the birds life outcomes as plumage and song acquisition [55, 56], fitness [57], survival [58] foraging [59] and offspring [52]. DPM is very researched in short-sized Passerines [56, 60, 61] and in long-size bird species as raptors [62, 63, 64], seabirds: [65], shorebirds: [66], waterfowl [67].

The Sexy-Sons Theory (SS)

In polygynous birds, females of polygynous males may compensate the multiple copulations of parents by increasing their own work load and don’t care for lower-quality offspring than monogynous mated females. Then what benefits for females are to be promiscuous?. The explanation is SS postulated in 1978 [68]. It affirms that females get indirect genetic benefits by mating with polygynous males passing its qualities to their sons allowing them to attract more females, producing fewer offspring and with more grandchildren sired by sexy sons. A beautiful work of SS in birds is given in starlings [69]. There are other works about this theory in birds using great tits [70], Zebra finches [71] and peafowl [72].

Conclusion

Modern EB has developed mainly by the works of Robert Trivers and Robert Fisher. Posteriorly, a group of theories rose on his paradigms. These theories conform to the framework of the modern EB.

Acknowledgement

This paper is dedicated to my ancient mother, a wise and smart woman, who allowed me to be a reader and writer. I thank the labor of peers in reviewing the manuscript.

References

  1. Mayr E (1961) Cause and effect in biology. Science 134(3489): 1501-1506.
  2. Tinbergen N (1963) On aims and methods of ethology. Tierpsychol 20: 410-433.
  3. Mayr E (1982) The growth of biological thought. Diversity, Evolution, and Inheritance.
  4. Gavin TA (1991) Why ask “why”: the importance of evolutionary biology in wildlife science. The Journal of wildlife management 55(4): 760-766.
  5. Darwin CR (1859) On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favored races in the struggle for life. John Murray, London, pp: 1-466.
  6. Trivers RL Willard DE (1973) Natural selection of parental ability to vary the sex ratio of offspring. Science 179: 90-92.
  7. Darwin CR (1871) The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. John Murray, London.
  8. Fisher RA (1930) The genetical theory of natural selection. Oxford Universty Press, UK.
  9. Bateman AJ (1948) Intra-sexual selection in Drosophila. Heredity 2: 349-368.
  10. Charnov EL (1982) The theory of sex allocation. Princeton University Press.
  11. Frank SA (1990) Sex allocation theory for birds and mammals. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 21: 13-55.
  12. Pamilo P (1991) Evolution of colony characteristics in social insects. I. Sex allocation. The American Naturalist 137(1): 83-107.
  13. Crozier RH, Pamilo P, Wrensch DL, Ebbert M (1993) Sex allocation in social insects: problems in prediction and estimation. Evolution and diversity of sex ratio in insects and mites pp: 369-383.
  14. Fuller BA, Mousseau TA (2007) Precision in sex allocation is influenced by mate choice in Drosophila melanogaster. Journal of evolutionary biology 20: 1700-1704.
  15. Mary CMS (1994) Sex allocation in a simultaneous hermaphrodite, the blue-banded goby (Lythrypnus dalli): the effects of body size and behavioral gender and the consequences for reproduction. Behavioral Ecology 5(3): 304-313.
  16. Navara KJ (2018a) Mechanisms of environmental sex determination in fish, amphibians, and reptiles. In Choosing sexes Springer, Cham, pp: 213-240.
  17. Navara KJ (2018) What Went Wrong at Jurassic Park? Modes of Sex Determination and Adaptive Sex Allocation in Reptiles. Choosing Sexes pp: 155-181.
  18. Clutton‐Brock TH (1986) Sex ratio variation in birds. Ibis 128(3): 317-329.
  19. Clutton-Brock TH, Iason GR (1986b) Sex ratio variation in mammals. Q Rev Biol 61(3): 339-374.
  20. Veller C, Haig D, Nowak MA (2016) The Trivers–Willard hypothesis: sex ratio or investment? Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences 283(1830).
  21. Lessells CM, Mateman AC, Visser J (1996) Great tit hatchling sex ratios. Journal of Avian Biology 27: 135- 142.
  22. Kilner R (1998) Primary and secondary sex ratio manipulation by zebra finches. Animal behavior 56(1): 155-164.
  23. Smallwood PD, Smallwood JA (1998) Seasonal shifts in sex ratios of fledgling American kestrels (Falco sparverius paulus): the early bird hypothesis. Evolutionary Ecology 12: 839-853.
  24. Blums P, Mednis A (1996) Secondary sex ratio in Anatinae. The Auk 113(2): 505-511.
  25. Westneat DF, Stewart IR, Woeste EH, Gipson J, Abdulkadir L, et.al (2002) Patterns of sex ratio variation in house sparrows. The Condor 104(3): 598-609.
  26. Darolová A, Kristofík J, Hoi H (2008) Female biased hatching order in nestling bearded tits: a compensatory maternal tactic to reduce developmental differences. Folia Zoologica 57(3): 231-239.
  27. Darolová A, Kristofík J, Hoi H (2009) Extreme brood sex ratios in Bearded Tits Panurus biarmicus. Ibis 151(1): 191-195.
  28. Donald PF (2007) Adult sex ratios in wild bird populations. Ibis 149(4): 671-692.
  29. Wiebe KL, Bortolotti GR (1992) Facultative sex ratio manipulation in American kestrels. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 30: 379-386.
  30. Sheldo BC, Andersson S, Griffith SC, Örnborg J, Sendecka J (1999) Ultraviolet colour variation influences blue tit sex ratios. Nature 402: 874-877.
  31. Whittingham LA, Dunn PO (2000) Offspring sex ratios in tree swallows: females in better condition produce more sons. Molecular ecology 9(8): 1123-1129.
  32. Gam AE, Mendonça MT, Navara KJ (2011) Acute corticosterone treatment prior to ovulation biases offspring sex ratios towards males in zebra finches Taeniopygia guttata. Journal of Avian Biology 42: 253- 258.
  33. Ewen JG, Cassey P, Møller AP (2004) Facultative primary sex ratio variation: a lack of evidence in birds?. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B Biological Sciences 271(1545): 1277-1282.
  34. Coleman RM, Gross MR (1991) Parental investment theory: the role of past investment. Trends Ecol Evol 6(12): 404-406.
  35. Kokko H, Jennions MD (2008) Parental investment, sexual selection and sex ratios. J Evol Biol 21(4): 919- 948.
  36. Mogilski JK (2020) Parental Investment Theory. The SAGE Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology chapter: 8.
  37. Andersson MB (1994) Sexual selection. Princeton Univ Press, pp: 624.
  38. Andersson MB (1986) Evolution of condition‐dependent sex ornaments and mating preferences: sexual selection based on viability differences. Evolution 40(4): 804-816.
  39. Almasi B, Roulin A, Jenni-Eiermann S, Jenni L (2008) Parental investment and its sensitivity to corticosterone is linked to melanin-based coloration in barn owls. Horm Behav 54(1): 217-223.
  40. Tieleman BI, Dijkstra TH, Klasing KC, Visser GH, Williams JB (2008) Effects of experimentally increased costs of activity during reproduction on parental investment and self-maintenance in tropical house wrens. Behavioral Ecology 19(5): 949-959.
  41. Angelier F, Chastel O (2009) Stress, prolactin and parental investment in birds: a review. General and comparative endocrinology 163(1-2): 142-148.
  42. Griggio M, Hoi H (2010) Only females in poor condition display a clear preference and prefer males with an average badge. BMC Ecology and Evolution 10: 1-7.
  43. Lucass C, Iserbyt A, Eens M, Müller W (2016) Structural (UV) and carotenoid‐based plumage coloration–signals for parental investment?. Ecol Evol 6(10): 3269-3279.
  44. Smiseth PT, Örnborg J, Andersson S, Amundsen T (2001) Is male plumage reflectance correlated with paternal care in bluethroats?. Behavioral Ecology 12(2): 164-170.
  45. Nakagawa S, Ockendon N, Gillespie DO, Hatchwell BJ, Burke T (2007) Does the badge of status influence parental care and investment in house sparrows? An experimental test. Oecologia 153(3): 749-760.
  46. Ouyang JQ, Muturi M, Quetting M, Hau M (2013) Small increases in corticosterone before the breeding season increase parental investment but not fitness in a wild passerine bird. Horm Behav 63(5): 776-781.
  47. Young RC, Barger CP, Dorresteijn I, Haussmann MF, Kitaysky AS (2016) Telomere length and environmental conditions predict stress levels but not parental investment in a long-lived seabird. Marine Ecology Progress Series 556: 251-259.
  48. Trivers RL (2017) Parental investment and sexual selection. Routledge pp: 136-179.
  49. Ancona S, Liker A, Carmona Isunza MC, Székely T (2020) Sex differences in age‐to‐maturation relate to sexual selection and adult sex ratios in birds. Evol Lett 4(1): 44- 53.
  50. Williams GC (1966) Natural selection, the costs of reproduction, and a refinement of Lack’s principle. The American Naturalist 100(916): 687-690.
  51. Smith MJ (1980) A new theory of sexual investment. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 7(3): 247-251.
  52. Hawkins GL Hill, GE Mercadante A (2012) Delayed plumage maturation and delayed reproductive investment in birds. Biological Reviews 87(2): 257-274.
  53. Ellegren H, Gustafsson L, Sheldon BC (1996) Sex ratio adjustment in relation to paternal attractiveness in a wild bird population. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93: 11723- 11728.
  54. Lifjeld JT, Kleven O, Jacobsen F, McGraw KJ, Safran RJ, et al. (2011) Age before beauty? Relationships between fertilization success and age-dependent ornaments in barn swallows. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 65(9): 1687-1697.
  55. Rohwer S, Fretwell SD, Niles DM (1980) Delayed maturation in passerine plumages and the deceptive acquisition of resources. The American Naturalist 115(3): 400-437.
  56. Cucco M, Malacarne G (2000) Delayed maturation in passerine birds: an examination of plumage effects and some indications of a related effect in song. Ethology Ecology & Evolution 12(3): 291-308.
  57. Oli MK, Hepp GR, Kennamer RA (2002) Fitness consequences of delayed maturity in female wood ducks. Evolutionary Ecology Research 4: 563-576.
  58. Nichols JD, Spendelow JA, Hines JE (1990) Capture- Recapture Estimation of Prebreeding Survival Rate for Birds Exhibiting Delayed Maturation. Journal of Field Ornithology 61(3): 347-354.
  59. Beauchamp G (2003) Delayed maturation in birds in relation to social foraging and breeding competition. Evolutionary Ecology Research 5: 589-596.
  60. Studd MV, Robertson RJ (1985) Life span, competition, and delayed plumage maturation in male passerines: the breeding threshold hypothesis. The American Naturalist 126(1): 101-115.
  61. Lyon BE, Montgomerie RD (1986) Delayed plumage maturation in passerine birds: reliable signaling by subordinate males?. Evolution 40(3): 605-615.
  62. Roulin A (1999) Delayed maturation of plumage coloration and plumage spottedness in the barn owl (Tyto alba). Journal für Ornithologie 140: 193-197.
  63. Vergara P, Fargallo JA (2007) Delayed plumage maturation in Eurasian kestrels: female mimicry, subordination signalling or both?. Animal Behaviour 74: 1505-1513.
  64. Negro JJ, Galván I (2018) Behavioural ecology of raptors. In Birds of Prey. Springer pp: 33-62.
  65. Valle CA, Hernández C (2006) Plumage and sexual maturation in the Great Frigatebird Fregata minor in the Galapagos Islands. Marine Ornithology 34: 51-59.
  66. Chu PC (1994) Historical examination of delayed plumage maturation in the shorebirds (Aves: Charadriiformes) Evolution 48: 327-350.
  67. Conover MR, Reese JG, Brown AD (2000) Costs and benefits of subadult plumage in mute swans: testing hypotheses for the evolution of delayed plumage maturation. The American Naturalist 156(2): 193-200.
  68. Weatherhead PJ, Robertson RJ (1979) Offspring quality and the polygyny threshold: “The sexy son hypothesis”. The American Naturalist 113(2): 201-208.
  69. Gwinner H, Schwabl H (2005) Evidence for sexy sons in European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 58: 375-382.
  70. Norris KJ (1990) Female choice and the evolution of the conspicuous plumage coloration of monogamous male great tits. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 26: 129- 138.
  71. Houtman AM (1992) Female zebra finches choose extra-pair copulations with genetically attractive males. Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences 249(1324).
  72. Petrie M (1992) Copulation frequency in birds: why do females copulate more than once with the same male?. Animal Behaviour 44(4): 790-792.
More from this journal

Cite this article

BibTeX
APA
RIS
@article{peiro2022,
  title   = {Modern Evolutionary Biology: Some Concepts, Questions and
Comments in Relation to Birds},
  author  = {Peiro IG},
  journal = {International Journal of Zoology and Animal Biology},
  year    = {2022},
  volume  = {5},
  number  = {2},
  doi     = {10.23880/izab-16000369}
}
Peiro IG (2022). Modern Evolutionary Biology: Some Concepts, Questions and
Comments in Relation to Birds. International Journal of Zoology and Animal Biology, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.23880/izab-16000369
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Modern Evolutionary Biology: Some Concepts, Questions and
Comments in Relation to Birds
AU  - Peiro IG
JO  - International Journal of Zoology and Animal Biology
PY  - 2022
VL  - 5
IS  - 2
DO  - 10.23880/izab-16000369
ER  -