2001
DOI: 10.2307/2680094
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sex- and Age-Related Variation in Survival and Cost of First Reproduction in Greater Flamingos

Abstract: We analyzed survival of breeding Greater Flamingos, Phoenicopterus ruber roseus, using the capture histories of 2000 breeding birds ringed as chicks and resighted at their natal colony in the Camargue, southern France. As found in previous analyses, recapture probability varied according to year, sex, and age of the bird, and annual survival was strongly affected by winter severity. However, by using a much larger data set than in earlier analyses, we detected previously nonsignificant effects. Indeed, for the… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

9
124
2

Year Published

2004
2004
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 76 publications
(135 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
9
124
2
Order By: Relevance
“…As a corollary of this, it has recently been shown that when faced with an artificial life-threatening risk during reproduction, individuals from species with high survival and low fecundity reacted by changing their behaviour to reduce risks to themselves, whereas individuals from low survival-high fecundity species would expose themselves to a higher risk to decrease the risk to their offspring (Ghalambor & Martin 2001;Martin 2002). Reducing the risks associated with breeding activity might be particularly important for young individuals for two reasons: they probably incur disproportionately high costs of breeding through reduced survival, as suggested in two recent studies (Tavecchia et al 2001;Orell & Belda 2002), and they may experience comparatively lower reproductive output (Green 2001;Magrath 2001). Thus, long-lived cooperative (or non-cooperative) species should be particularly reluctant to breed in suboptimal habitats or under suboptimal conditions, as indicated by several correlative studies (Emlen 1990;Koenig et al 1992;Komdeur et al 1995;Frederiksen & Bregnballe 2001;Ekman et al 2001).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As a corollary of this, it has recently been shown that when faced with an artificial life-threatening risk during reproduction, individuals from species with high survival and low fecundity reacted by changing their behaviour to reduce risks to themselves, whereas individuals from low survival-high fecundity species would expose themselves to a higher risk to decrease the risk to their offspring (Ghalambor & Martin 2001;Martin 2002). Reducing the risks associated with breeding activity might be particularly important for young individuals for two reasons: they probably incur disproportionately high costs of breeding through reduced survival, as suggested in two recent studies (Tavecchia et al 2001;Orell & Belda 2002), and they may experience comparatively lower reproductive output (Green 2001;Magrath 2001). Thus, long-lived cooperative (or non-cooperative) species should be particularly reluctant to breed in suboptimal habitats or under suboptimal conditions, as indicated by several correlative studies (Emlen 1990;Koenig et al 1992;Komdeur et al 1995;Frederiksen & Bregnballe 2001;Ekman et al 2001).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This circumstance denotes the existence of a high turn-over 314 rate in territorial individuals, mainly females, and, although no evidence of lower 315 survival in immature breeders was found, the differences in breeding success between 316 immature and adult individuals might be worth investigating. However, assessing the 317 effects of the cost of first reproduction requires a long-term data set with a large number 318 of individuals (Tavecchia et al 2001). It should be noted that the overall survival rate 319 observed in our populations was intermediate between those reported in the studies of 320 Olsson (1997) and Schaub et al (2010).…”
Section: Survival Analysis 146mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…reduced survival, future reproduction) outweigh the benefits (Pyle et al 1997, Tavecchia et al 2001, although studies using lifetime reproductive success generally do not agree with this assumption (Newton 1989, Viallefont et al 1995. In population modelling, the long deferred age of first breeding may have a significant influence on the outcome of the population (Authors unpubl.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%