To Guard Mates or Go Forage: Conflicting Demands Affect the Paternity of Male Red-Winged Blackbirds
To Guard Mates or Go Forage: Conflicting Demands Affect the Paternity of Male Red-Winged Blackbirds
复制标题
保护配偶或外出觅食：冲突的需求影响雄性红翅黑鸟的亲子关系
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1994
影响因子：
2.9
通讯作者：
D. Westneat
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
D. Westneat
寻找配偶和产生后代的行为有明显的健康益处(即更多的后代)，而且似乎受到选择的青睐。然而，交配以外的活动同时也会影响健康，例如提供父母照料(见Trivers1972；Emlen和Oring 1977；Maynard Smith 1977)，寻找替代交配(见Parker 1970；Grafen 1980)，躲避捕食者和寻找食物(见Williams 1966；Gadgil和Bossert 1970)。倾向于增加交配分配的选择可能会被倾向于分配给这些其他一个或多个行动的选择所反对。尽管这一想法在交配行为和生活史的理论研究中发挥了重要作用，并且是对观察到的行为模式的常见解释(参见，例如，Williams 1966,1975；Triver1972；Emlen和Oring 1977；Maynard Smith 1977；ThornHill和Alcock 1983；Clutton-Brock 1991；Lessels 1991)，但令人惊讶的是，很少有实验研究通过操纵假设的冲突需求的各个方面来直接测试理论。一种有趣的交配行为是守护配偶。许多分类群的雄性通过长时间依附于它们来隔离可受精的雌性(例如，见Parker 1970；Siva-Jothy 1987；Carroll 1993)，跟随它们四处走动(例如见Beecher和Beecher 1979；ThornHill和Alcock 1983；Birkhead和M0ler 1992)，或将所有其他雄性赶走(例如见M0ler 1987A；Sherman 1989)。不仅在物种之间，甚至在种群内部，守卫的程度、时间和形式都存在巨大的差异(例如，见M0ler 1987a)。如果配对守卫确实受到相互冲突的需求的影响，那么这种差异可能是由于影响守卫收益或成本的因素的差异。守卫的好处可能是因为雄性阻止配偶与其他雄性交配的能力不同而产生的。如果雄性对雌性的吸引力不同，那么雌性可能会在逃避配偶和追求与其他雄性交配的倾向上有所不同。例如，在东部蓝知更鸟(Sialia Sialis)中，守卫更严密的雄性比守卫不那么严密的雄性有更低的亲子关系(Gowaty和Bridges 1991)，如果喜欢的雄性的配偶避开其他雄性，而不喜欢的雄性的配偶不这样做，就可能发生这种情况。或者，男性的竞争能力可能不同；一些男性可能天生就不擅长守卫，而另一些男性可能擅长守卫。守护的有效性不同的想法并不经常被检验；事实上，被广泛接受的守护行为会增加亲子关系的假设很少被直接检验。一些对昆虫和哺乳动物的研究表明，雄性在受精过程中
Behaviors involved in finding mates and producing offspring have clear fitness benefits (i.e., more descendants) and would seem to be favored by selection. Yet activities other than mating can simultaneously affect fitness, such as providing parental care (see, e.g., Trivers 1972; Emlen and Oring 1977; Maynard Smith 1977), seeking alternative matings (see, e.g., Parker 1970; Grafen 1980), and avoiding predators and finding food (see, e.g., Williams 1966; Gadgil and Bossert 1970). Selection favoring increased allocation to mating might hus be opposed by selection favoring allocation to one or more of these other actions. Although this idea has played an important part in theoretical studies of mating behavior and life histories and is a common explanation for observed patterns of behavior (see, e.g., Williams 1966, 1975; Trivers 1972; Emlen and Oring 1977; Maynard Smith 1977; Thornhill and Alcock 1983; Clutton-Brock 1991; Lessels 1991), there are surprisingly few experimental studies that directly test theory by manipulating aspects of the hypothesized conflicting demand. One interesting type of mating behavior is the guarding of mates. Males of many taxa sequester fertilizable females by remaining attached to them for long periods of time (see, e.g., Parker 1970; Siva-Jothy 1987; Carroll 1993), following them around (see, e.g., Beecher and Beecher 1979; Thornhill and Alcock 1983; Birkhead and M0ller 1992), or chasing all other males away (see, e.g., M0ller 1987a; Sherman 1989). Tremendous variation exists in the extent, timing, and form of guarding, not just among species but even within populations (see, e.g., M0ller 1987a). If mate guarding is indeed subject to conflicting demands, then this variation could be due to variation in factors influencing either the benefits or costs of guarding. Variation in the benefits of guarding might arise from variation in the ability of males to prevent matings between their mates and other males. If males varied in attractiveness tofemales, then females might vary in their propensity to elude their mates and pursue copulations with other males. For example, in eastern bluebirds (Sialia sialis), males that guard more intensely have lower paternity than males that guard less intensely (Gowaty and Bridges 1991), which might occur if the mates of preferred males avoid other males whereas mates of less preferred males do not. Alternatively, males might differ in their competitive abilities; some males might be intrinsically poor at guarding whereas others might be good at guarding. The idea that guarding varies in effectiveness has not often been examined; in fact, the widely held assumption that guarding behavior increases paternity has rarely been tested directly. Some studies of insects and mammals have shown that the male present during fertilization