Female‐solicited extrapair matings in Humboldt penguins fail to produce extrapair fertilizations
Abstract
The study reported in this paper demonstrated that Humboldt penguins at Punta San Juan, Peru, despite forming pair-bonds, are not strictly monogamous in their mating behavior: 19.2% of the study males and 30.7% of the study females (21 nests) engaged in extrapair copulations. The total number of completed matings observed during the course of this study was 106, of which 17.9% were extrapair copulations. Using DNA fingerprinting we demonstrated that none of these extrapair copulations resulted in extrapair fertilizations; all 49 offspring were attributed to the putative father. Location of copulations suggested that females solicited these extrapair copulations because 89.2% of Humboldt penguin within-pair copulations occurred at the home burrow, yet extrapair copulations took place at a different location based on the sex of the penguin. Extrapair copulations by males occurred at their nest, whereas females conducted 92% of their extrapair copulations away from the nest. These results are most consistent with mate-appraisal and epiphenomenal hypotheses.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Extra-pair copulation has been described in Humboldt penguins and Adélie penguins.
“Although long believed a monogamous species, extra-pair copulation has been described in different penguin species: the Humboldt penguin (Spheniscus humboldti; Schwartz et al. 1999) and the Adélie penguin (Pygoscelis adeliae; Hunter et al. 1995;Hunter and Davis 1998;Pilastro et al. 2001;Sakaoka et al. 2014).”
From Molecular Genetics Unveiled Unknown Family Relationships and Hybrids in an Ex-Situ Colony of African Penguins (Spheniscus demersus) (2018) · cites this paper as Schwartz et al. 1999
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Modesto, P., Biolatti, C., Favaro, L., Colussi, S., Peletto, S., Piga, S., Riina, M. V., Pessani, D., Trincas, E., Isaja, V., et al. (2018) · Journal of Heredity · doi:10.1093/jhered/esy032 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
- Authors
- Schwartz, M. K.
- Affiliations
- University of Montana (US)
- Corresponding author
- Schwartz, M. K.
- ORCID
- Schwartz, M. K.
- Venue
- Behavioral Ecology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1999-05-01
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 242-250
- ISSN
- 1045-2249 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-7279
- OpenAlex
- W2124945279
- Cited by
- 48
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 8.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Behavioral Ecology (publishedVersion)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- Smithsonian Digital Repository (Smithsonian Institution) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Avian ecology and behavior
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Marriage and Sexual Relationships
- Keywords
- Humboldt penguin, Spheniscus magellanicus, extra-pair copulation, extra-pair paternity, female mate choice, pair bonding, monogamy, DNA fingerprinting, paternity
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