Cited by 2,330Animal Behavior and ReproductionNeuroendocrine regulation and behaviorAvian ecology and behavior

The "Challenge Hypothesis": Theoretical Implications for Patterns of Testosterone Secretion, Mating Systems, and Breeding Strategies

Wingfield, John C., Hegner, Robert E., Dufty,, Alfred M., Ball, Gregory F.·1990·The American Naturalist

Abstract

A number of investigations in recent years have shown that seasonal profiles of testosterone (T) levels in the blood of male birds breeding under natural condi- tions are highly variable. As a result of the application of field endocrinology techniques (see Wingfield and Farner 1976), the temporal patterns of T secretion in free-living males are now known for over 20 species (from 6 orders and 14 families), representing three mating systems (monogamy, polygyny, and polyan- dry) and several breeding strategies. Results of these studies provide the impetus for an assessment of the potential relationships between T and breeding systems. The concepts emerging from their analysis can serve both as a framework for further investigation of the hormonal mechanisms underlying social behavior of vertebrates in general and as a guide for manipulating social systems to gain new insights into the ultimate cause of different mating strategies. The extent of these differences varies considerably among species (Wingfield 1984a; Wingfield et al. 1987) and raises a number of questions. Why is there so much variation in the temporal patterns of circulating T levels between captive and free-living populations and among species? Are there relationships between temporal patterns of T secretion and mating systems or the breeding strategies of individuals? What are the environmental and genetic determinants of these patterns and their functions? In this article we consider some theoretical approache…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/285134

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wingfield, J. C., Hegner, R. E., Dufty, & Ball, G. F.
Affiliations
University of Washington (US)
Venue
The American Naturalist
Published
1990-12
Volume
136
Issue
6
Pages
829-846
ISSN
  • 0003-0147 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5323
OpenAlex
W2038202625
Cited by
2,330
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 40 · 2025: 48 · 2024: 66 · 2023: 60 · 2022: 75 · 2021: 102 · 2020: 90 · 2019: 108 · 2018: 92 · 2017: 105 · 2016: 113 · 2015: 108 · 2014: 123 · 2013: 129 · 2012: 109
FWCI
17.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The American Naturalist (publishedVersion)
  • Scholar Works (Boise State University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Avian ecology and behavior
Keywords
challenge hypothesis, testosterone secretion, male birds, mating systems, breeding strategies, monogamy, polygyny, polyandry, social behavior, hormonal regulation of behavior

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