Carry-over effects of the social environment on future divorce probability in a wild bird population

Culina, Antica; Hinde, Camilla A.; Sheldon, Ben C.

doi:10.1098/rspb.2015.0920

Cited by 14 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 57 publications

(78 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This method is robust for inferring flocking events and preferable to other methods such as using arbitary time intervals [ 27 ]. Furthermore, the flocking events extracted using this method are known to be non-random in social composition [ 28 ], related to individuals social associations in other contexts [ 37 , 38 ] and important to various social processes such as information spread [ 39 , 40 ] and mating [ 15 , 25 , 36 ]. We defined pair meeting time as the month (the first three winters) or the weekend (the last three winters) when the members of the future breeding pair were first identified in the same flock (i.e.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the second three winters (2011/2012 to 2013/ 2014), data were collected between early September and early March when all of the 65 feeders were opened during each weekend. Detailed description of the data collection set-up can be found in [27][28][29]36]. The feeder-availability protocol minimized the possibility that flocks would get attracted to the constant food sources and we assume that data gathered at feeders represent snapshots of the social composition of different flocks at the time of recording.…”

Section: (B) Winter Data Collection Set-upmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Familiarity breeds success: pairs that meet earlier experience increased breeding performance in a wild bird population

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In socially monogamous animals, including humans, pairs can meet and spend time together before they begin reproduction. However, the pre-breeding period has been challenging to study in natural populations, and thus remains largely unexplored. As such, our understanding of the benefits of mate familiarity is almost entirely limited to assessments of repeated breeding with a particular partner. Here, we used fine-scale tracking technology to gather 6 years of data on pre-breeding social associations of individually marked great tits in a wild population. We show that pairs which met earlier in the winter laid their eggs earlier in all years. Clutch size, number of hatched and fledged young, and hatching and fledging success were not influenced by parents' meeting time directly, but indirectly: earlier laying pairs had larger clutches (that also produce higher number of young), and higher hatching and fledging success. We did not detect a direct influence of the length of the initial pairing period on future mating decisions (stay with a partner or divorce). These findings suggest a selective advantage for a new pair to start associating earlier (or for individuals to mate with those they have known for longer). We call for more studies to explore the generality of fitness effects of pair familiarity prior to first breeding, and to elucidate the mechanisms underlying these effects.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: (B) Winter Data Collection Set-upmentioning

confidence: 99%

Familiarity breeds success: pairs that meet earlier experience increased breeding performance in a wild bird population

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is important to understand whether and how individuals can adapt to socially imposed traits, such as dominance, which can have large fitness consequences (Gosler, 1996;Colléter & Brown, 2011;Gilby et al, 2013). Moreover, insight into how social relations and thus social structures form, are maintained, and change, is crucial for understanding the long-term consequences of the social context, including group positioning and social network connectivity (Romey & Galbraith, 2008;Oh & Badyaev, 2010;Formica et al, 2012;Shizuka et al, 2014;Culina et al, 2015;Snijders et al, 2017). Furthermore, understanding the mechanisms of social structuring can be key for identifying keystone individuals and their influence on the social context (Modlmeier et al, 2014).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Personality is associated with dominance in a social feeding context in the great tit

Bibi

Wei

et al. 2019

Behav.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the growing interest in consistent individual differences in behaviour (animal personality), the influence of social context on different behavioural types remains poorly understood. The suite of correlated behaviours within and across contexts is called behavioural syndromes. Most personality studies have investigated consistent individual behavioural types and their consequences in a asocial context, however few studies have considered the influence of social context on individual behaviour. In addition, the evolutionary and ecological consequences of personality differences in social context remain unknown. In the present study, we confirm individual personality in Great tits (Parus major) using room exploration and neophobia tests. As a result of these two tests, repeatability and correlational structure of two personality traits were investigated. Additionally we assessed the extent to which personality influences dominance in a social feeding context.Great tits remained consistent in their personality traits (exploration and neophobia). Individuals who explored a novel environment faster also approached a novel object faster, while those who spent more time exploring a novel environment were also slower to approach a novel object. In a social feeding context personality was linked to dominance: with proactive individuals being more likely to be dominant. Our result provides evidence of the importance of social context in a wild population of birds and may have fitness consequence, both for focal individuals and their conspecifics.

show abstract

“…Breeding pairs occupy exclusive territories, but when their offspring fledge, these territories break down. After fledging, offspring roam around with their parents and those families typically break apart after a few weeks (Naef‐Daenzer, Widmer, & Nuber, ), while the parents often stay together Culina, Hinde, & Sheldon, , Firth, Voelkl, Farine, & Sheldon, ). The offspring assimilate into the population, but dispersal is spatially restricted, meaning that individuals interact more with others born in close proximity and also slightly more with siblings (Grabowska‐Zhang et al., ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social and spatial effects on genetic variation between foraging flocks in a wild bird population

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social interactions are rarely random. In some instances, animals exhibit homophily or heterophily, the tendency to interact with similar or dissimilar conspecifics, respectively. Genetic homophily and heterophily influence the evolutionary dynamics of populations, because they potentially affect sexual and social selection. Here, we investigate the link between social interactions and allele frequencies in foraging flocks of great tits (Parus major) over three consecutive years. We constructed co-occurrence networks which explicitly described the splitting and merging of 85,602 flocks through time (fission-fusion dynamics), at 60 feeding sites. Of the 1,711 birds in those flocks, we genotyped 962 individuals at 4,701 autosomal single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). By combining genomewide genotyping with repeated field observations of the same individuals, we were able to investigate links between social structure and allele frequencies at a much finer scale than was previously possible. We explicitly accounted for potential spatial effects underlying genetic structure at the population level. We modelled social structure and spatial configuration of great tit fission-fusion dynamics with eigenvector maps. Variance partitioning revealed that allele frequencies were strongly affected by group fidelity (explaining 27%-45% of variance) as individuals tended to maintain associations with the same conspecifics. These conspecifics were genetically more dissimilar than expected, shown by genomewide heterophily for pure social (i.e., space-independent) grouping preferences. Genomewide homophily was linked to spatial configuration, indicating spatial segregation of genotypes. We did not find evidence for homophily or heterophily for putative socially relevant candidate genes or any other SNP markers. Together, these results demonstrate the importance of distinguishing social and spatial processes in determining population structure.

show abstract

Carry-over effects of the social environment on future divorce probability in a wild bird population

Cited by 14 publications

References 57 publications

Familiarity breeds success: pairs that meet earlier experience increased breeding performance in a wild bird population

Familiarity breeds success: pairs that meet earlier experience increased breeding performance in a wild bird population

Personality is associated with dominance in a social feeding context in the great tit

Social and spatial effects on genetic variation between foraging flocks in a wild bird population

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About