Many organisms time reproduction to photoperiod, a constant from year to year. Predicting how anthropogenic change will influence future timing demands greater knowledge of the current role of photoperiod. We held two closely related bird populations in a common environment. One population is resident; the other winters in sympatry with the resident population but migrates north prior to reproducing. We increased photoperiod gradually and measured preparation for migration and reproduction, using feather stable isotopes to estimate breeding latitude. We predicted population differences in the minimum stimulatory day length to elicit a response (CPP, critical photoperiod) and co-variation between CPP and distance migrated. We found clear population differences in CPP and greater CPP in longer distance migrants. We conclude that current geographic variation in reproductive timing has a genetic or early developmental basis and recommend that future research focus on how anthropogenic changes will interact with CPP to adjust timing of reproduction and migration.

Hybridization has important effects on the evolutionary trajectories of natural populations but estimates of this process in the wild and at the individual‐level are lacking. Justyn et al. attempted to fill this gap using the citizen science database eBird but there are limitations to this approach. Here, we outline and directly test these limitations using literature searches, case studies, and a comparison between eBird and Birds of North America (BNA), a database that documents hybridization using the scientific literature. We use a hybrid zone between Lazuli and Indigo buntings to highlight the importance of considering geographic range when estimating rates of hybridization and two literature searches to show the importance of considering cryptic hybrids (those that cannot be identified using phenotypic traits) when quantifying these rates. We also use BNA and a case study of hybrid White‐faced and Glossy Ibises to show that citizen scientists are underreporting hybrids compared with experts. Justyn et al. highlighted an important gap in the literature, but their results likely represent the lower limit of hybridization between birds and a more nuanced interpretation of their results (e.g., considering extrinsic postzygotic selection) is needed.

Like many scientific disciplines, the field of reproductive biology is subject to biases in terminology and research foci. For example, females are often described as the coy and passive players in reproductive behaviors and are termed ‘promiscuous’ if they engage in extra-pair copulations. Males on the other hand are viewed as actively holding territories and fighting with other males. Males are termed ‘multiply mating’ if they mate with multiple females. Similarly, textbooks often illustrate meiosis as it occurs in males but not females. This edition of ICB includes a series of papers that focus on reproduction from the female perspective. These papers were a subset of the work presented in our symposium and complimentary sessions on female reproductive biology. In this manuscript, we use a question and answer format to leverage the diverse perspectives and voices involved with the symposium in an exploration of theoretical, cultural, pedagogical, and scientific issues related to the study of female biology. We hope this dialog will provide a stepping-stone toward moving reproductive science and teaching to a more gender-neutral and objective framework.

Divergent migratory strategies among populations can result in population‐level differences in timing of reproduction (allochrony) and local adaptation. However, the mechanisms underlying among‐population variation in timing are insufficiently understood, particularly in females. We studied differences in reproductive development and its related mechanisms along the hypothalamic–pituitary–gonadal axis (HPG) in closely related migratory and sedentary (i.e. resident) female dark‐eyed juncos (Junco hyemalis) living together in sympatry during early spring. Despite exposure to the same environmental cues in early spring, residents initiate breeding prior to the departure of migrants for their breeding grounds. We investigated whether residents would be more reproductively developed than migrants based on their behavioural differences. Alternatively, females could exhibit similar reproductive development in response to the same environmental cues despite differences in migratory behaviour. To compare their degree of reproductive development during seasonal sympatry and the underlying mechanisms of these differences, we collected ovarian and liver tissue in early spring prior to migration and compared transcript abundance of genes associated with reproduction using quantitative PCR. We also used stable hydrogen isotopes to infer relative breeding and wintering latitude of migrants. We found higher transcript abundance of luteinizing hormone receptor and aromatase in the ovary in addition to significantly heavier ovaries in residents than in migrants. Together, these results suggest greater sensitivity and response to upstream endocrine stimulation in resident females. Transcript abundance for other receptors in the ovary and liver associated with reproduction, however, did not differ between populations. When comparing ovarian development within migrants, females with lower hydrogen isotopes (indicating higher breeding latitudes) had smaller ovaries, suggesting that longer‐distance migrations may further delay reproductive development. Based on differences in ovary mass and transcript abundance, we conclude that females that differ in migratory strategy also differ in timing of reproductive development. These results support that divergent migratory behaviour drives allochrony and could enable reproductive isolation between populations; mechanistic differences at the level of gonadal stimulation can explain these differences in timing of reproductive development. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.