Inter-Nest Variability in the Egg to Hatchling Mass Ratio in the Common Pochard Aythya ferina: Does Female Body Mass Matter?

David Hořák; Tomas Albrecht; Petr Klvaňa; Petr musil

doi:10.3161/068.042.0110

How to translate text using browser tools

1 July 2007 Inter-Nest Variability in the Egg to Hatchling Mass Ratio in the Common Pochard Aythya ferina: Does Female Body Mass Matter?

David Hořák, Tomas Albrecht, Petr Klvaňa, Petr musil

Author Affiliations +

Acta Ornithologica, 42(1):33-38 (2007). https://doi.org/10.3161/068.042.0110

Abstract

Offspring survival and subsequent fitness are assumed to increase with offspring size. Although the relationship between egg size and young size in birds has attracted considerable scientific attention, to our knowledge no study so far has investigated differences among nests with respect to this relationship. The aim of this study was to find out 1) whether some inter-nest variation in the egg mass — young mass relationship exists among nests of Common Pochards, and 2) whether such a variation could be attributed to the body mass of the female measured in the last 5 days of incubation. Egg mass explained a higher portion of the variability in young mass in nests of heavier females. Those females produced smaller young for eggs of a given size. We suggest a trade-off between current and future reproduction as being the evolutionary mechanism underlying the relationship between female body mass and hatchling body mass.

REFERENCES

1.

R. T. Alisauskas 1986. Variation in the composition of the eggs and chicks of American Coots. Condor 88: 84–90. Google Scholar

2.

R. T. Alisauskas , C. D. Ankney 1992. The cost of egg laying and its relationship to nutrient reserves in waterfowl. In: B. D. J. Batt , A. D. Afton , M. G. Anderson , C. D. Ankney , D. H. Johnson , J. A. Kadlec , G. L. Krapu (eds). Ecology and Management of Breeding Waterfowl. Univ. Minnesota Press, Minneapolis & London, 30–61 pp. Google Scholar

3.

V. R. Anderson , R. T. Alisauskas 2001. Egg size, body size, locomotion, and feeding performance in captive King Eider duckling. Condor 103: 195–199. Google Scholar

4.

V. R. Anderson , R. T. Alisauskas 2002. Composition and growth of King Eider ducklings in relation to egg size. Auk 119: 62–70. Google Scholar

5.

J. Bernardo 1996a. The particular maternal effect of propagule size, especially egg size: patterns, models, quality of evidence and interpretations. Am. Zool. 36: 216–236. Google Scholar

6.

J. Bernardo 1996b. Maternal effect in animal ecology. Am. Zool. 36: 83–105. Google Scholar

7.

M. J. Crawley 2003. Statistical Computing: An Introduction to Data Analysis using S-Plus. John Willey and Sons Ltd., Chichester. Google Scholar

8.

R. D. Dawson , R. G. Clark 1996. Effects of variation in egg size and hatching date on survival of Lesser Scaup Aythya affinis ducklings. Ibis 138: 693–699. Google Scholar

9.

B. D. Dugger , P. Blums 2001. Effect of conspecific brood parasitism on host fitness for Tufted Duck and Common Pochard. Auk 118: 717–726. Google Scholar

10.

K. Erikstad , T. Tveraa , J. O. Bustnes 1998. Significance of intraclutch egg-size variation in Common Eider: the role of size and quality of ducklings. J. Avian Biol. 29: 3–9. Google Scholar

11.

E. Geffen , Y. Yom-Tov 2001. Factors affecting the rates of intraspecific nest parasitism among Anseriformes and Galliformes. Anim. Behav. 62:1027–1038. Google Scholar

12.

A. J. Green 2001. Mass/length residuals: measures of body condition or generators of spurious results? Ecology 82: 1473–1483. Google Scholar

13.

S. A. Hanssen , D. Hasselquist , I. Folstad , K. E. Erikstad 2005. Cost of reproduction in a long-lived bird: incubation effort reduces immune function and future reproduction. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 272: 1039–1046. Google Scholar

14.

G. R. Hepp , T. H. Folk , C. A. Manlove 2005. Nest temperature, incubation period, and investment decisions of incubating Wood Ducks Aix sponsa. J. Avian Biol. 36: 523–530. Google Scholar

15.

G. R. Hepp , R. A. Kennamer , M. H. Johnson 2006. Maternal effects in Wood Ducks: incubation temperature influences incubation period and neonate phenotype. Func. Ecol. 20: 307–314. Google Scholar

16.

D. Hořák , Albrecht T. in press.: Using net-sacks to examine the relationship between egg size and young size in Common Pochards. J. Field Ornithol. Google Scholar

17.

D. K. Kellet , R. T. Alisauskas , K. R. Mehl , K. L. Drake , J. J. Traylor , S. L. Lawson 2005. Body mass of Long-tailed Ducks (Clangula hyemalis) during incubation. Auk 122: 313– 318. Google Scholar

18.

C. E. Korschgen , K. P. Kenow , W. L. Green , D. H. Johnson , M. D. Samuel , L. Sileo 1996. Survival of radiomarked Canvasback ducklings in northwestern Minnesota. J. Wildl. Manage. 60: 120–132. Google Scholar

19.

C. M. Lessells , N. J. Dingemanse , C. Both 2002. Egg weights, egg component weights, and laying gaps in Great Tits (Parus major) in relation to ambient temperature. Auk 119: 1091–1103. Google Scholar

20.

A. Lourens , den Brand H. van , R. Meijerhof , B. Kemp 2005. Effect of eggshell temperature during incubation on embryo development, hatchability, and posthatch development. Poultry Sci. 84: 914–920. Google Scholar

21.

A. Lourens , R. Molenaar , H. van den Brand , M. J. W. Heetkamp , R. Meijerhof , B. Kemp 2006. Effect of egg size on heat production and the transition of energy from egg to hatchling. Poultry Sci. 85: 770–776. Google Scholar

22.

A. L. Moran , R. B. Emlet 2001. Offspring size and performance in variable environments: field studies on a marine snail. Ecology 82: 1597–1612. Google Scholar

23.

R. G. Nager , P. Monaghan , D. C. Houston 2000. Within-clutch trade-offs between the number and quality of eggs: Experimental manipulations in gulls. Ecology 81: 1339–1350. Google Scholar

24.

J. T. Pelayo , R. G. Clark 2002. Variation in size, composition, and quality of Ruddy Duck eggs and ducklings. Condor 104: 457–462. Google Scholar

25.

W. L. Reed , A. M. Turner , P. R. Sotherland 1999. Consequences of egg-size variation in the Red-winged Blackbird. Auk 116: 549–552. Google Scholar

26.

J. M. Rhymer 1988. The effect of egg size variability on thermoregulation of Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) offspring and its implications for survival. Oecologia 75: 20–24. Google Scholar

27.

F. C. Rohwer 1988. Inter- and intraspecific relationships between egg size and clutch size in waterfowl. Auk 105: 161–176. Google Scholar

28.

C. C. Smith , S. D. Fretwell 1974. The optimal balance between size and number of offspring. Am. Nat. 108: 499–506. Google Scholar

29.

P. R. Sotherland , H. Rahn 1987. On the composition of bird eggs. Condor 89: 48–65. Google Scholar

30.

S. C. Stearns 1992. The evolution of life histories. Oxford Univ. Press, New York. Google Scholar

31.

P. Tryjanowski , T. H. Sparks , L. Kuczyński , S. Kuźniak 2004. Should avian egg size increase as a result of global warming? A case study using the red-backed shrike (Lanius collurio). J. Ornithol. 145: 264–268. Google Scholar

32.

M. E. Visser , C. M. Lessells 2001. The costs of egg production and incubation in Great Tits (Parus major). Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 268: 1271–1277. Google Scholar

33.

M. W. Weiler 1956. A simple field candler for waterfowl eggs. J. Wildl. Manage. 20: 111–113. Google Scholar

34.

M. W. Weiler 1957. An automatic nest-trap for waterfowl. J. Wildl. Manage. 21: 456–458. Google Scholar

35.

T. D. Williams 1994. Intraspecific variation in egg size and egg composition in birds: Effects on offspring fitness. Biol. Rev. 68: 35–59. Google Scholar

36.

M. C. Zicus , M. R. Riggs 1996. Changes in body mass of female Common Goldeneyes during nesting and brood rearing. Wilson Bull. 108: 61–71. Google Scholar

Citation Download Citation

David Hořák, Tomas Albrecht, Petr Klvaňa, and Petr musil "Inter-Nest Variability in the Egg to Hatchling Mass Ratio in the Common Pochard Aythya ferina: Does Female Body Mass Matter?," Acta Ornithologica 42(1), 33-38, (1 July 2007). https://doi.org/10.3161/068.042.0110

Received: 1 October 2006; Accepted: 1 January 2007; Published: 1 July 2007

JOURNAL ARTICLE
6 PAGES

DOWNLOAD PAPER + SAVE TO MY LIBRARY