The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Sexual dimorphism in birds: why are there so many different forms of dimorphism?
Open accessAbstract
Variation in the extent of sexual dimorphism among bird species is traditionally attributed to differences in social mating system. However, there are many different forms of dimorphism among birds, and not all of them show an obvious correlation with social mating system. For example, recent work has shown that many highly polygamous species are, in fact, monomorphic, whereas many putatively monogamous species are dimorphic. In this paper we break up sexual dimorphism into subcomponents and then use comparative analyses to examine the pattern of covariation between these subcomponents and various aspects of sexual, social, and parental behaviour. Our first finding is that size dimorphism and plumage–colour dimorphism do not show the same pattern of covariation. Differences in size dimorphism are associated with variation in social mating system and sex differences in parental care, whereas differences in plumage–colour dimorphism are associated with variation in the frequency of extra–bond paternity. These results suggest that size dimorphism is associated with the sort of intrasexual competition described by traditional classifications of social mating system, whereas plumage–colour dimorphism is associated with cryptic female choice. However, when we break up plumage–colour dimorphism according to whether it is due to melanins, carotenoids or structural colours, we find that each category of plumage–colour dimorphism shows a different pattern of covariation. The correlation between overall plumage–colour dimorphism and the rate of extra–bond paternity is due to structural colours, whereas melanin–based dimorphism is associated with sex differences in parental care. The former result is particularly interesting given that new work suggests structural colours are associated with active sexual displays and the reflection of ultraviolet light.
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
Phylogenies and the Comparative Method
Felsenstein, J. (1985) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/284325 · Cited by 9,793
The Comparative Method in Evolutionary Biology
Harvey, P. H., & Pagel, M. D. (1991) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198546412.001.0001 · Cited by 4,337
Cited by
Extra-Pair Paternity in Birds: Causes, Correlates, and Conflict
Westneat, D. F., & Stewart, I. R. K. (2003) · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132439 · Cited by 687
Why do females mate multiply? A review of the genetic benefits
JENNIONS, M. D., & PETRIE, M. (2000) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1469-185x.1999.tb00040.x · Cited by 554
The effects of life history and sexual selection on male and female plumage colouration
Dale, J., Dey, C. J., Delhey, K., Kempenaers, B., & Valcu, M. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature15509 · Cited by 391
Iridescence: a functional perspective
Doucet, S. M., & Meadows, M. G. (2009) · Journal of The Royal Society Interface · doi:10.1098/rsif.2008.0395.focus · Cited by 342
Metadata
- Authors
- Owens, I. P. F., & Hartley, I. R.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 1998-03-07
- Volume
- 265
- Issue
- 1394
- Pages
- 397-407
- ISSN
- 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
- 0962-8452
- 1471-2954
- OpenAlex
- W2021704357
- Cited by
- 499
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 11.00
- 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: Sexual dimorphism in birds: why are there so many different forms of dimorphism? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rspb.1998.0308
- The paper
- Owens, I. P. F., & Hartley, I. R. (1998). Sexual dimorphism in birds: why are there so many different forms of dimorphism? Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.1998.0308
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.