Loading…
A Test of the “Sexy Son” Hypothesis: Sons of Polygynous Collared Flycatchers Do Not Inherit Their Fathers’ Mating Status
According to the original “sexy son” hypothesis, a female may benefit from pairing with an already‐mated male despite a reduction in fecundity because her sons inherit their father’s attractiveness. We used data from a long‐term study of collared flycatchers (Ficedula albicollis) collected during 24...
Saved in:
Published in: | The American naturalist 2006-02, Vol.167 (2), p.297-302 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-ddf4912961e4b564c4abc4e89852cf6930aa0a148a23df824250527a83175b3e3 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-ddf4912961e4b564c4abc4e89852cf6930aa0a148a23df824250527a83175b3e3 |
container_end_page | 302 |
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 297 |
container_title | The American naturalist |
container_volume | 167 |
creator | Gustafsson, Lars Qvarnström, Anna |
description | According to the original “sexy son” hypothesis, a female may benefit from pairing with an already‐mated male despite a reduction in fecundity because her sons inherit their father’s attractiveness. We used data from a long‐term study of collared flycatchers (Ficedula albicollis) collected during 24 years to test this prediction. Our results show that the sons of polygynously mated females fledged in poor condition and therefore did not inherit their father’s large forehead patch (a condition‐dependent display trait) or mating status. From the female’s perspective, polygynous pairing resulted in fewer recruited grandchildren than did a monogamous pairing. The reproductive value of sons did not outweigh the fecundity costs of polygyny because the low paternal care reduced the attractiveness of sons. When there are long‐lasting parental effects on offspring attractiveness, costs of polygyny may include the production of nonsexy sons. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1086/498623 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67928957</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>10.1086/498623</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>10.1086/498623</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-ddf4912961e4b564c4abc4e89852cf6930aa0a148a23df824250527a83175b3e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkctq20AUhofQkrhp8wSlDFlkp2bul-6CGyeBXAp212IsjWIZWePMjCDaFL9GoX05P0lG2CTQTVeHc87Hz_nPD8AJRl8xUuKcaSUIPQAjzKnMOCX0HRghhGiGMJNH4EMIy9RqpvkhOMJCSKSVGoFfF3BmQ4SugnFh4XbzZ2qfezh17XbzF173a5fGoQ7fhlEYsB-u6R_71nUBjl3TGG9LOGn6wsRiYX2A3x28dxHetKmrI5wtbO3hxMRhud38hncm1u0jnEYTu_ARvK9ME-ynfT0GPyeXs_F1dvtwdTO-uM0KykXMyrJiGhMtsGVzLljBzLxgVmnFSVEJTZExyGCmDKFlpQgjHHEijaJY8jm19Bic7XTX3j11yXC-qkNh0_mtTU5yITVRmsv_glgiqagawNN_wKXrfJtM5FgryTES6k2t8C4Eb6t87euV8X2OUT7klu9yS-CXvVo3X9nyDdsHlYDPO2AZovOvezq8Jfl_ATMPnKQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>198751068</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A Test of the “Sexy Son” Hypothesis: Sons of Polygynous Collared Flycatchers Do Not Inherit Their Fathers’ Mating Status</title><source>JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection</source><creator>Gustafsson, Lars ; Qvarnström, Anna</creator><contributor>Locke Rowe ; Michael C. Whitlock</contributor><creatorcontrib>Gustafsson, Lars ; Qvarnström, Anna ; Locke Rowe ; Michael C. Whitlock</creatorcontrib><description>According to the original “sexy son” hypothesis, a female may benefit from pairing with an already‐mated male despite a reduction in fecundity because her sons inherit their father’s attractiveness. We used data from a long‐term study of collared flycatchers (Ficedula albicollis) collected during 24 years to test this prediction. Our results show that the sons of polygynously mated females fledged in poor condition and therefore did not inherit their father’s large forehead patch (a condition‐dependent display trait) or mating status. From the female’s perspective, polygynous pairing resulted in fewer recruited grandchildren than did a monogamous pairing. The reproductive value of sons did not outweigh the fecundity costs of polygyny because the low paternal care reduced the attractiveness of sons. When there are long‐lasting parental effects on offspring attractiveness, costs of polygyny may include the production of nonsexy sons.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-0147</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1537-5323</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1086/498623</identifier><identifier>PMID: 16670988</identifier><identifier>CODEN: AMNTA4</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: The University of Chicago Press</publisher><subject>Animal behavior ; Animal nesting ; Animal populations ; Animal reproduction ; Animals ; Bird nesting ; Birds ; Breeding ; Effects ; Evolutionary biology ; Fecundity ; Female ; Female animals ; Fertility ; Ficedula albicollis ; Flycatchers ; Inheritance Patterns ; Male ; Male animals ; Mating behavior ; Nature ; Nesting Behavior ; Notes and Comments ; Passeriformes - anatomy & histology ; Passeriformes - physiology ; Preferences ; Reproductive success ; Sexual Behavior, Animal ; Sons</subject><ispartof>The American naturalist, 2006-02, Vol.167 (2), p.297-302</ispartof><rights>2006 by The University of Chicago.</rights><rights>Copyright University of Chicago, acting through its Press Feb 2006</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-ddf4912961e4b564c4abc4e89852cf6930aa0a148a23df824250527a83175b3e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-ddf4912961e4b564c4abc4e89852cf6930aa0a148a23df824250527a83175b3e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16670988$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Locke Rowe</contributor><contributor>Michael C. Whitlock</contributor><creatorcontrib>Gustafsson, Lars</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Qvarnström, Anna</creatorcontrib><title>A Test of the “Sexy Son” Hypothesis: Sons of Polygynous Collared Flycatchers Do Not Inherit Their Fathers’ Mating Status</title><title>The American naturalist</title><addtitle>Am Nat</addtitle><description>According to the original “sexy son” hypothesis, a female may benefit from pairing with an already‐mated male despite a reduction in fecundity because her sons inherit their father’s attractiveness. We used data from a long‐term study of collared flycatchers (Ficedula albicollis) collected during 24 years to test this prediction. Our results show that the sons of polygynously mated females fledged in poor condition and therefore did not inherit their father’s large forehead patch (a condition‐dependent display trait) or mating status. From the female’s perspective, polygynous pairing resulted in fewer recruited grandchildren than did a monogamous pairing. The reproductive value of sons did not outweigh the fecundity costs of polygyny because the low paternal care reduced the attractiveness of sons. When there are long‐lasting parental effects on offspring attractiveness, costs of polygyny may include the production of nonsexy sons.</description><subject>Animal behavior</subject><subject>Animal nesting</subject><subject>Animal populations</subject><subject>Animal reproduction</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Bird nesting</subject><subject>Birds</subject><subject>Breeding</subject><subject>Effects</subject><subject>Evolutionary biology</subject><subject>Fecundity</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Female animals</subject><subject>Fertility</subject><subject>Ficedula albicollis</subject><subject>Flycatchers</subject><subject>Inheritance Patterns</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Male animals</subject><subject>Mating behavior</subject><subject>Nature</subject><subject>Nesting Behavior</subject><subject>Notes and Comments</subject><subject>Passeriformes - anatomy & histology</subject><subject>Passeriformes - physiology</subject><subject>Preferences</subject><subject>Reproductive success</subject><subject>Sexual Behavior, Animal</subject><subject>Sons</subject><issn>0003-0147</issn><issn>1537-5323</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2006</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkctq20AUhofQkrhp8wSlDFlkp2bul-6CGyeBXAp212IsjWIZWePMjCDaFL9GoX05P0lG2CTQTVeHc87Hz_nPD8AJRl8xUuKcaSUIPQAjzKnMOCX0HRghhGiGMJNH4EMIy9RqpvkhOMJCSKSVGoFfF3BmQ4SugnFh4XbzZ2qfezh17XbzF173a5fGoQ7fhlEYsB-u6R_71nUBjl3TGG9LOGn6wsRiYX2A3x28dxHetKmrI5wtbO3hxMRhud38hncm1u0jnEYTu_ARvK9ME-ynfT0GPyeXs_F1dvtwdTO-uM0KykXMyrJiGhMtsGVzLljBzLxgVmnFSVEJTZExyGCmDKFlpQgjHHEijaJY8jm19Bic7XTX3j11yXC-qkNh0_mtTU5yITVRmsv_glgiqagawNN_wKXrfJtM5FgryTES6k2t8C4Eb6t87euV8X2OUT7klu9yS-CXvVo3X9nyDdsHlYDPO2AZovOvezq8Jfl_ATMPnKQ</recordid><startdate>20060201</startdate><enddate>20060201</enddate><creator>Gustafsson, Lars</creator><creator>Qvarnström, Anna</creator><general>The University of Chicago Press</general><general>University of Chicago, acting through its Press</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20060201</creationdate><title>A Test of the “Sexy Son” Hypothesis: Sons of Polygynous Collared Flycatchers Do Not Inherit Their Fathers’ Mating Status</title><author>Gustafsson, Lars ; Qvarnström, Anna</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-ddf4912961e4b564c4abc4e89852cf6930aa0a148a23df824250527a83175b3e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2006</creationdate><topic>Animal behavior</topic><topic>Animal nesting</topic><topic>Animal populations</topic><topic>Animal reproduction</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Bird nesting</topic><topic>Birds</topic><topic>Breeding</topic><topic>Effects</topic><topic>Evolutionary biology</topic><topic>Fecundity</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Female animals</topic><topic>Fertility</topic><topic>Ficedula albicollis</topic><topic>Flycatchers</topic><topic>Inheritance Patterns</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Male animals</topic><topic>Mating behavior</topic><topic>Nature</topic><topic>Nesting Behavior</topic><topic>Notes and Comments</topic><topic>Passeriformes - anatomy & histology</topic><topic>Passeriformes - physiology</topic><topic>Preferences</topic><topic>Reproductive success</topic><topic>Sexual Behavior, Animal</topic><topic>Sons</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gustafsson, Lars</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Qvarnström, Anna</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The American naturalist</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gustafsson, Lars</au><au>Qvarnström, Anna</au><au>Locke Rowe</au><au>Michael C. Whitlock</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A Test of the “Sexy Son” Hypothesis: Sons of Polygynous Collared Flycatchers Do Not Inherit Their Fathers’ Mating Status</atitle><jtitle>The American naturalist</jtitle><addtitle>Am Nat</addtitle><date>2006-02-01</date><risdate>2006</risdate><volume>167</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>297</spage><epage>302</epage><pages>297-302</pages><issn>0003-0147</issn><eissn>1537-5323</eissn><coden>AMNTA4</coden><abstract>According to the original “sexy son” hypothesis, a female may benefit from pairing with an already‐mated male despite a reduction in fecundity because her sons inherit their father’s attractiveness. We used data from a long‐term study of collared flycatchers (Ficedula albicollis) collected during 24 years to test this prediction. Our results show that the sons of polygynously mated females fledged in poor condition and therefore did not inherit their father’s large forehead patch (a condition‐dependent display trait) or mating status. From the female’s perspective, polygynous pairing resulted in fewer recruited grandchildren than did a monogamous pairing. The reproductive value of sons did not outweigh the fecundity costs of polygyny because the low paternal care reduced the attractiveness of sons. When there are long‐lasting parental effects on offspring attractiveness, costs of polygyny may include the production of nonsexy sons.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>The University of Chicago Press</pub><pmid>16670988</pmid><doi>10.1086/498623</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0003-0147 |
ispartof | The American naturalist, 2006-02, Vol.167 (2), p.297-302 |
issn | 0003-0147 1537-5323 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67928957 |
source | JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection |
subjects | Animal behavior Animal nesting Animal populations Animal reproduction Animals Bird nesting Birds Breeding Effects Evolutionary biology Fecundity Female Female animals Fertility Ficedula albicollis Flycatchers Inheritance Patterns Male Male animals Mating behavior Nature Nesting Behavior Notes and Comments Passeriformes - anatomy & histology Passeriformes - physiology Preferences Reproductive success Sexual Behavior, Animal Sons |
title | A Test of the “Sexy Son” Hypothesis: Sons of Polygynous Collared Flycatchers Do Not Inherit Their Fathers’ Mating Status |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T00%3A46%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20Test%20of%20the%20%E2%80%9CSexy%20Son%E2%80%9D%20Hypothesis:%20Sons%20of%20Polygynous%20Collared%20Flycatchers%20Do%20Not%20Inherit%20Their%20Fathers%E2%80%99%20Mating%20Status&rft.jtitle=The%20American%20naturalist&rft.au=Gustafsson,%20Lars&rft.date=2006-02-01&rft.volume=167&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=297&rft.epage=302&rft.pages=297-302&rft.issn=0003-0147&rft.eissn=1537-5323&rft.coden=AMNTA4&rft_id=info:doi/10.1086/498623&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E10.1086/498623%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-ddf4912961e4b564c4abc4e89852cf6930aa0a148a23df824250527a83175b3e3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=198751068&rft_id=info:pmid/16670988&rft_jstor_id=10.1086/498623&rfr_iscdi=true |