English   español  
Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar a este item: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/8988
Compartir / Impacto:
Add this article to your Mendeley library MendeleyBASE
Ver citas en Google académico
Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL
Exportar otros formatos: Exportar EndNote (RIS)Exportar EndNote (RIS)Exportar EndNote (RIS)

Flight, fitness, and sexual selection

Autor Møller, Anders Pape; Barbosa, Andrés
Palabras clave Flight
Sexual selection
Fecha de publicación 2001
EditorInternational Society for Behavioral Ecology
Citación Behavioral Ecology, Vol. 12 No. 4: 511-512
ResumenBuchanan and Evans (2000) have recently suggested that the length of the tail streamer of the barn swallow Hirundo rustica is influenced to a large extent by natural selection, although sexual selection also plays a role. This conclusion was reached from analyses of video films of the flight of males and females after reducing the length of their tails by a variable amount ranging from 0 to 20 mm. Evans (1998) has previously made a similar experiment with a 20 mm manipulation. The optimum phenotype was subsequently derived from analyses of the flight parameters, while taking a number of other factors such as sex, farm, morphology, and date into account. Here we suggest that although it is likely that in fact streamer evolution was due to both natural and sexual selection, there is little direct evidence to support the reported conclusions. Although natural selection obviously plays a role in determining the selective landscape affecting tail length (e.g., Møller, 1989; Møller et al., 1995; Saino and Møller, 1996; Saino et al., 1997), it is far from clear that the cost is mainly measured in terms of foraging ability. Other factors like parasitism and disease have already been shown to be important (Saino and Møller, 1996; Saino et al., 1997). The reasons why the paper by Buchanan and Evans (2000) does not resolve whether tail length is mainly influenced by natural or sexual selection are as follows. (1) Buchanan and Evans did not standardize the conditions under which the measurements were made. (2) They provide no direct evidence for any of their aerodynamic parameters having a fitness consequence. (3) The birds were filmed at variable intervals since the experimental manipulation. (4) The context in which the flight behavior was recorded does not represent the relevant selective pressure.
Versión del editorhttp://beheco.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/12/4/511
URI http://hdl.handle.net/10261/8988
Aparece en las colecciones: (EEZA) Artículos
Ficheros en este ítem:
No hay ficheros asociados a este ítem.
Mostrar el registro completo

NOTA: Los ítems de Digital.CSIC están protegidos por copyright, con todos los derechos reservados, a menos que se indique lo contrario.