The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Immunocompetence, ornamentation, and viability of male barn swallows (Hirundo rustica)
Open accessAbstract
Immunocompetence (i.e., the ability to produce an immune response to pathogens) can be predicted to influence the chances that organisms have to survive and reproduce. In this study we simulated a challenge to the immune systems of male barn swallows (Hirundo rustica) by injecting them intraperitoneally with a multigenic antigen, sheep red blood cells, and we analyzed long-term survival in relation to their immunocompetence. Males were assigned to four groups that differed for the treatment of the length of the outermost tail feathers, a sexually dimorphic ornamental character that is currently under directional sexual selection. Immunocompetence was measured as change of concentration of gamma globulins relative to plasma proteins. The intensity of the immune response was independent of age. Males that showed the highest short-term response to sheep red blood cells were more likely to survive until the breeding season following that in which they had been inoculated, a pattern consistently observed within each experimental group. Males with comparatively long tails were more likely to survive than those with short tails. To our knowledge, the results of this study are the first to demonstrate that immunocompetence can predict long-term survival in a free-ranging vertebrate. Moreover, they are compatible with current models of parasite-mediated sexual selection because long-tailed males are more immunocompetent than short-tailed ones, and females, by preferring to mate with the most ornamented males, may acquire the “good genes” for high immunocompetence and, hence, for high viability of their offspring.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Parasites, Bright Males, and the Immunocompetence Handicap
Folstad, I., & Karter, A. J. (1992) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/285346 · Cited by 2,799
Cited by
Simple means to improve the interpretability of regression coefficients
Schielzeth, H. (2010) · Methods in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.2041-210x.2010.00012.x · Cited by 3,027
Repeatability for Gaussian and non-Gaussian data: a practical guide for biologists.
Nakagawa, S., & Schielzeth, H. (2010) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1469-185x.2010.00141.x · Cited by 2,584
An evaluation of methods for modelling species distributions
Segurado, P., & Araújo, M. B. (2004) · Journal of Biogeography · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2699.2004.01076.x · Cited by 875
Hundred‐year decline of North Atlantic predatory fishes
Christensen, V., Guénette, S., Heymans, J. J., Walters, C. J., Watson, R., Zeller, D., & Pauly, D. (2003) · Fish and Fisheries · doi:10.1046/j.1467-2979.2003.00103.x · Cited by 466
Consumer‐food systems: why type I functional responses are exclusive to filter feeders
Jeschke, J. M., Kopp, M., & Tollrian, R. (2004) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1017/s1464793103006286 · Cited by 437
Metadata
- Authors
- Saino, N., Bolzern, A. M., & Møller, A. P.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 1997-01-21
- Volume
- 94
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 549-552
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W2051337798
- Cited by
- 1,355
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 48.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Immunocompetence, ornamentation, and viability of male barn swallows (Hirundo rustica). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.94.2.549
- The paper
- Saino, N., Bolzern, A. M., & Møller, A. P. (1997). Immunocompetence, ornamentation, and viability of male barn swallows (Hirundo rustica). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.94.2.549
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.