The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Male heterozygosity predicts territory size, song structure and reproductive success in a cooperatively breeding bird
Open accessAbstract
Recent studies of non-social animals have shown that sexually selected traits signal at least one measure of genetic quality: heterozygosity. To determine whether similar cues reveal group quality in more complex social systems, we examined the relationship between territory size, song structure and heterozygosity in the subdesert mesite (Monias benschi), a group-living bird endemic to Madagascar. Using nine polymorphic microsatellite loci, we found that heterozygosity predicted both the size of territories and the structure of songs used to defend them: more heterozygous groups had larger territories, and more heterozygous males used longer, lower-pitched trills in their songs. Heterozygosity was linked to territory size and song structure in males, but not in females, implying that these traits are sexually selected by female choice and/or male-male competition. To our knowledge, this study provides the first direct evidence in any animal that territory size is related to genetic diversity. We also found a positive association between seasonal reproductive success and heterozygosity, suggesting that this heritable characteristic is a reliable indicator of group quality and fitness. Given that heterozygosity predicts song structure in males, and can therefore be determined by listening to acoustic cues, we identify a mechanism by which social animals may assess rival groups, prospective partners and group mates, information of potential importance in guiding decisions related to conflict, breeding and dispersal.
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.
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?
Females probably gain direct benefits by choosing an outbred male over an inbred male.
“females probably gain direct benefits by choosing an outbred (i.e. more heterozygous) male over an inbred (i.e. less heterozygous) male (e.g. because the former has smaller territory sizes [14–16] or contributes less to parental care [17] than the latter).”
From ‘Out of tune’: consequences of inbreeding on bird song (2016) · cites this paper as [14]
The Abstract reports the opposite territory-size relationship: more heterozygous groups had larger territories, not smaller ones. It suggests heterozygosity may signal group quality and fitness, but does not establish that females gain direct benefits by choosing more heterozygous males. (LLM, conf=0.90)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredChoosing based on heterozygosity can provide direct benefits, for example through larger territory sizes or increased parental care.
“Additionally, choosing based on heterozygosity can provide direct benefits, for example through larger territory sizes [14–16] or increased parental care [17].”
From ‘Out of tune’: consequences of inbreeding on bird song (2016) · cites this paper as [14]
The Abstract reports that more heterozygous subdesert mesite groups had larger territories, supporting the territory-size example attributed to this paper. It suggests female choice and a possible way to assess prospective partners, but does not show that choosing a more heterozygous partner provides the chooser with a direct benefit. The parental-care example carries a different citation and is not assessed here. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 48 · Cited by 135
Research works printed but not linked: 48
- 10.1038/422035a · DOI
- 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.32.081501.114034 · DOI
- 10.1098/rspb.2001.1751 · DOI
- Andersson M. 1994 Sexual selection. Princeton University Press. · DOI
- 10.1006/anbe.2001.1840 · DOI
- 10.2307/4089063 · DOI
- 10.1046/j.1095-8312.2002.00112.x · DOI
- 10.1046/j.1365-2656.2000.00382.x · DOI
- 10.1093/beheco/8.1.60 · DOI
- 10.1034/j.1600-0706.2001.950204.x · DOI
- 10.1126/science.296.5565.69 · DOI
- 10.1098/rspb.1998.0363 · DOI
- Coltman D. W., 1999, Parasite-mediated selection against inbred Soay sheep in a free-living island population, Evolution, 53, 1259
- 10.1098/rspb.1998.0321 · DOI
- 10.1006/anbe.1993.1090 · DOI
- Danchin E. Heg D. & Doligez B. 2001 Public information and breeding habitat selection. In Dispersal (ed. J. Clobert E. Danchin A. A. Dhondt & J. D. Nichols) pp. 243-258. Oxford University Press. · DOI
- Evans M. I. Hawkins A. F. A. & Duckworth J. W. 1996 Family Mesitornithidae (mesites). In Handbook of birds of the world vol. 3 (ed. J. del Hoyo A. Elliott & J. Sargatal) pp. 34-43. Barcelona: Lynx Editions.
- Fisher R. A. 1930 The genetic theory of natural selection. Oxford: Clarendon. · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/nature01969 · DOI
- 10.1046/j.1365-294X.2002.01644.x · DOI
- Hedrick P., 2001, Evaluation of mean d2, a microsatellite measure of inbreeding and outbreeding, in wolves with known pedigree, Evolution, 55, 1256
- 10.1098/rspb.2001.1937 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1098/rspb.1998.0323 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0169-5347(02)02489-8 · DOI
- 10.1006/anbe.1994.1118 · DOI
- Lowe P. R., 1924, On the anatomy and systematic position of the Madagascan bird Mesites (Mesoenas), with a preliminary note on the osteology of Monias, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 1, 1131
- 10.1098/rsbl.2003.0081 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1474-919X.1999.tb07375.x · DOI
- 10.1007/BF02424505 · DOI
- 10.1650/0010-5422(2000)102[0553:DBSAAF]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
- 10.1098/rspb.2003.2419 · DOI
- 10.1098/rspb.1995.0054 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.0908-8857.2001.320302.x · DOI
- 10.1098/rspb.2003.2480 · DOI
- Seddon N. 2001 The ecology communication and conservation of the subdesert mesite Monias benschi. PhD thesis Cambridge UK.
- 10.1163/15685390260136753 · DOI
- 10.1034/j.1600-048X.2003.03067.x · DOI
- 10.1017/S0030605300031355 · DOI
- 10.1007/s00265-002-0488-9 · DOI
- 10.1046/j.1474-919X.2003.00150.x · DOI
- Sherman P. T. 1996 Family Psophidae (Trumpeters). In Handbook of the birds of the world vol. 3 (ed. J. del Hoyo A. Elliott & J. Sargatal) pp. 96-107. Barcelona: Lynx Editions.
- Slate J. David P. Dodds K. G. Veenvliet B. A. Glass B. C. Broad T. E. & McEwen J. C. 2004 Understanding the relationship between the inbreeding coefficient and multilocus heterozygosity: theoretical implications and empirical data. Heredity. Published online 14 July 2004. (DOI 10.1038/sj.hdy.6800485.) · DOI
- Stacey P. B. & Koenig W. D. 1990 Cooperative breeding in birds. Cambridge University Press. · DOI
- 10.1016/S0006-3207(02)00106-4 · DOI
- Todd I. 1992 WILDTRAK: non-parametric home-range analysis for the Macintosh. Oxford University Press.
- 10.2307/1369896 · DOI
- 10.1006/anbe.1997.0631 · DOI
- 10.1126/science.280.5371.1928 · DOI
Metadata
- Authors
- Seddon, N., Amos, W., Mulder, R. A., & Tobias, J. A.
- Affiliations
- Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, UK
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- The University of Melbourne (AU)
- BirdLife international (GB)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 2004-09-07
- Volume
- 271
- Issue
- 1550
- Pages
- 1823-1829
- ISSN
- 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
- 0962-8452
- 1471-2954
- PMC
- PMC1691794
- OpenAlex
- W1996155920
- Cited by
- 135
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 5.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Natural Environment Research Council
- Newnham College, University of Cambridge
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Vocal Communication and Behavior
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Avian ecology and behavior
- Keywords
- heterozygosity, genetic quality, territory size, song structure, reproductive success, cooperative breeding, sexual selection, female mate choice, male-male competition, acoustic signals, genetic diversity, social information, microsatellite markers
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Birds, Heterozygote, Madagascar, Male, Regression Analysis, Reproduction, Seasons, Sex Factors, Social Behavior, Territoriality, Genetic Variation, Vocalization, Animal, Microsatellite Repeats
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
