The elaborate plumage in peacocks is not such a drag
Open accessAbstract
One of the classic examples of an exaggerated sexually selected trait is the elaborate plumage that forms the train in male peafowl Pavo cristatus (peacock). Such ornaments are thought to reduce locomotor performance as a result of their weight and aerodynamic drag, but this cost is unknown. Here, the effect that the train has on take-off flight in peacocks was quantified as the sum of the rates of change of the potential and kinetic energies of the body (PCoM) in birds with trains and following the train's removal. There was no significant difference between PCoM in birds with and without a train. The train incurs drag during take-off; however, while this produces a twofold increase in parasite drag, parasite power only accounts for 0.1% of the total aerodynamic power. The train represented 6.9% of body weight and is expected to increase induced power. The absence of a detectable effect on take-off performance does not necessarily mean that there is no cost associated with possessing such ornate plumage; rather, it suggests that given the variation in take-off performance per se, the magnitude of any effect of the train has little meaningful functional relevance.
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
The peacock’s train does not significantly impair take-off flight performance in this study, despite increasing parasite drag and adding mass. The author concludes that any cost of the train is small and of limited functional relevance to take-off.
Key findings
- Total mass-specific centre-of-mass power during take-off was not significantly different between birds with trains and after train removal (222.6±43.3 vs 210.0±25.5 W kg⁻¹; t₄=0.41, ns).
- Total aerodynamic power was also not significantly different (414.1±31.2 vs 393.3±27.1 W kg⁻¹; t₄=0.55, ns), although parasite power was significantly higher with the train (0.4±0.05 vs 0.2±0.03 W kg⁻¹; t₄=−2.63, P=0.013).
- At the mean flight velocity of 4 m s⁻¹, drag on the train was 0.12–0.15 N; this produced a twofold increase in parasite drag, but parasite power accounted for only 0.1% of total aerodynamic power. The train represented 6.9% of body mass.
- Estimated train production cost was 17.5 MJ, or about 96.3 kJ day⁻¹, representing ~10% of basal metabolic rate and 3% of field metabolic rate.
Methods
- Five mature adult male Indian peafowl (*Pavo cristatus*) were flown in a flight arena; flights were recorded with two synchronised high-speed video cameras at 125 frames s⁻¹, both with the train present and after its removal.
- Take-off performance was quantified as the sum of rates of change of potential and kinetic energy of the body (P_CoM), with aerodynamic power components estimated using an aerodynamic model; wind tunnel tests measured forces on the train at angles of 0, −10 and −20 deg and free-stream velocities of 3.6–8 m s⁻¹.
- Flight performance variables and aerodynamic power components were analysed using paired t-tests with Bonferroni–Holm correction for multiple comparisons.
Limitations
- The paper states that the absence of a detectable effect does not necessarily mean there is no cost; other potential costs include effects on moment of inertia and flight control, running performance, and feather production, and these could be subtle and cumulative.
- The paper states that flights were performed in a familiar arena using captive-bred birds, conditions that could potentially compromise performance, and whether flights were maximal is not known, though power and work outputs were close to maxima reported in other species.
- Evident from the text: the sample was small (five individuals), and train removal involved cutting feathers rather than a sham manipulation, which may limit generalisability and control.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
2 of 15 cited sources checked · 2 supported · 0 flagged
- Premisecitation§ DISCUSSION
The cost of feather production is estimated at 54.9 kJ per gram of dry feathers.
“The cost of feather production, C f , is estimated to be 54.9 kJ g -1 dry feathers [following Lindstrom et al. (Lindstrom et al., 1993) and using an estimate of basal metabolic rate from Lasiewski and Dawson (Lasiewski and Dawson, 1967)].”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked - Findingown data§ Take-off performance
The rate of change of potential energy did not differ significantly between peacocks with and without a train.
“The rate of change of potential energy was not significantly different between the two conditions (Table 2).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingreasoning§ DISCUSSION
The train caused a significant twofold increase in parasite power.
“This results in a significant, twofold increase in parasite power”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ Abstract
Parasite power made up only 0.1% of the total aerodynamic power required for take-off.
“parasite power only accounts for 0.1% of the total aerodynamic power.”
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
“as parasite power only represents 0.1% of the total aerodynamic power requirements”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
- Findingown data§ DISCUSSION
The expected effect of increased mass on induced power and flight performance was not detected.
“However, this effect was not detected.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
- Findingown data§ DISCUSSION
The maximal total aerodynamic power recorded across individual peacocks averaged 403.7±19.8 W/kg.
“The maximal P aero recorded across individuals was similar and averaged 403.7±19.8W kg -1 .”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ Abstract
In male peafowl, the total mass-specific power of the centre of mass during take-off did not differ significantly between birds with a train and birds after the train was removed.
“There was no significant difference between P CoM in birds with and without a train.”
- Also stated in: § Graham N. Askew* · plain
“The total mass-specific power of the centre of mass of the body (P CoM ; calculated relative to pectoralis muscle mass) was not significantly different between birds with and without trains (train P CoM =222.6±43.3W kg -1 ; no train P CoM =210.0±25.5 W kg -1 ; t 4 =0.41,ns; Fig. 1A,C, Table 2).”
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
“P CoM was not significantly different in birds possessing trains compared with those birds from which the train had been removed.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § Graham N. Askew* · plain
- Findingown data§ Aerodynamic forces on the peafowl train
At the mean take-off flight velocity of about 4 m/s, drag on the train ranged from 0.12 N when level to 0.15 N at -10 degrees.
“At the mean flight velocity for birds (4 m s -1 ) possessing a train, the drag on the train ranged from 0.12 N (level) to 0.15 N (-10 deg)”
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
“the drag on the train was only 0.12-0.15N.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
- Findingown data§ Abstract
The train accounted for 6.9% of the peacock's body mass.
“The train represented 6.9% of body weight”
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
“The train represents 6.9% of the bird's body mass.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
- Findingown data§ Take-off performance
The rate of loss of kinetic energy was similar in the train and no-train conditions.
“the rate of loss of kinetic energy was similar across the two treatments (Table 2).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ Aerodynamic power
The total aerodynamic power requirement of take-off did not differ significantly between peacocks with a train and peacocks without a train.
“The total power requirement of take-off (P aero ) was not significantly different between the two conditions (train P aero =414.1±31.2W kg -1 ; no train P aero =393.3±27.1 W kg -1 ; t 4 =0.55,ns; Fig. 1B, Table 2).”
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · hedged
“There was no significant difference in P aero between the two treatments, suggesting that birds with trains were not maintaining take-off performance (P CoM ) simply by increasing the mechanical power output of the flight muscles (P aero ).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · hedged
- Findingown data§ Aerodynamic forces on the peafowl train
During take-off, the train was held at an angle between 0 and -10 degrees relative to the elevation of the bird's flight path.
“during take-off, the train was held at an angle of between 0 and -10 deg relative to the angle of elevation of the flight trajectory of the bird.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ Aerodynamic power
Parasite drag was significantly greater in peacocks with a train than in the same birds after train removal.
“Parasite drag was significantly higher in birds with a train compared with birds following the train's removal (Table 2).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ Take-off performance
In every bird, the rate of increase in potential energy was much greater than the rate of loss of kinetic energy.
“Note that in all birds the rate of increase in potential energy far exceeded the rate of loss of kinetic energy”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ Abstract
The train produced a twofold increase in parasite drag.
“while this produces a twofold increase in parasite drag”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Study design and conductcitation§ DISCUSSION
The total power measured during take-off was close to maximal power values reported for other bird species: 395 W/kg in magpie, 350 W/kg in grey jay, and 390 W/kg in blue-breasted quail.
“the total power is close to the maximal power reported in other species [395 W kg -1 in magpie, 350 W kg -1 in grey jay (Jackson and Dial, 2011); 390 W kg -1 in blue breasted quail (Askew et al., 2001)].”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked - Interpretationreasoning§ Take-off performance
Because potential energy increased more than kinetic energy was lost, the flight muscles must have produced net positive mechanical power to move the body's centre of mass.
“hence, net positive mechanical power is required from the flight muscles to move the centre of mass of the body (CoM) of the bird.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data§ Conclusions
Possessing a train does not detrimentally affect take-off flight performance in peacocks.
“here it is demonstrated that possessing a train does not detrimentally affect take-off flight performance.”
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
“possessing a train does not significantly reduce flight take-off performance”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
- Interpretationreasoning§ DISCUSSION
The drag of the train has trivial effects on flight performance.
“the effects of the drag of the train on flight performance are trivial.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data§ DISCUSSION
Peacocks with trains were not maintaining take-off performance simply by increasing the mechanical power output of their flight muscles.
“There was no significant difference in P aero between the two treatments, suggesting that birds with trains were not maintaining take-off performance (P CoM ) simply by increasing the mechanical power output of the flight muscles (P aero ).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data§ Abstract
Given the natural variation in take-off performance, any effect of the train has little meaningful functional relevance.
“rather, it suggests that given the variation in take-off performance per se, the magnitude of any effect of the train has little meaningful functional relevance.”
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
“the magnitude of the effect has little meaningful functional relevance (given the high variability in individual take-off performance per se; Table 2, Fig. 1A)”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
- Interpretationreasoning§ Abstract
The lack of a detectable effect of the train on take-off performance does not necessarily mean that possessing the train carries no cost.
“The absence of a detectable effect on take-off performance does not necessarily mean that there is no cost associated with possessing such ornate plumage”
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
“The absence of a detectable effect of the male peafowl train on flight take-off performance does not necessarily mean that there is no cost to possessing a train: there are other potential costs.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
- Premisecitation§ DISCUSSION
Diurnal mass gains of 5.3% in great tits have been shown to have no significant effect on escape flight performance.
“Diurnal mass gains of 5.3% in great tits have also been shown to have no significant effect on escape flight performance (Macleod, 2006).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Macleod, 2006 source
- May combine two claims. 12
- Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 9
May combine two claims.
Interpretationreasoning§ DISCUSSIONBecause the train is produced over about six months, its production cost is estimated at 96.3 kJ per day, about 10% of basal metabolic rate and 3% of field metabolic rate.
“The train is produced over ~6 months (M.Caunce, personal communication), such that the train production costs are estimated to be 96.3 kJ day -1 , representing ~10% of basal metabolic rate [947 kJ day -1 (Lasiewski and Dawson, 1967)] and 3% of field metabolic rate [2805 kJ day -1 , estimated from a scaling equation for Galliformes (Nagy et al., 1999)].”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checkedMay combine two claims.
Findingreasoning§ DISCUSSIONThe train in this study weighed 320 g, giving an estimated production cost of 17.5 MJ.
“The mass of the train in this study was 320 g, giving an estimated cost of producing the train of 17.5 MJ.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown data§ Aerodynamic powerProfile power and the power needed to generate induced velocity did not differ significantly between peacocks with and without a train.
“Profile power and the power required to generate the induced velocity were not significantly different between the two conditions (Table 2).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingcitation§ DISCUSSIONDrag on the train depends on flight velocity and on the angle at which the train is held relative to the bird's flight path.
“The drag on the train depends on flight velocity and the angle at which it is held relative to the flight trajectory of the bird (Fig. 2) (see also Evans and Thomas, 1992).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Evans and Thomas, 1992 source
May combine two claims.
Findingown data§ Take-off performanceTake-off velocity and velocity at the end of the second wingstroke did not differ significantly between peacocks with and without a train.
“The velocity of the bird at take-off and the flight velocity of the peafowl at the end of the second wingstroke were not significantly different between the two treatments (Table 2).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown data§ Aerodynamic forces on the peafowl trainDrag on the peafowl train rose linearly with air velocity at each tested angle and was greatest at steeper angles.
“The drag on the train increased linearly with increasing air velocity for each angle and was highest at steeper angles (Fig. 2).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).
Interpretationreasoning§ DISCUSSIONIncreasing body mass is expected to raise induced power and thereby reduce flight performance through a decrease in centre-of-mass power.
“Increasing body mass is expected to increase induced power (through increases in thrust and induced velocity), and therefore to decrease flight performance via a reduction in P CoM .”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
Study design and conductnone given§ DISCUSSIONIt is not known whether the recorded flights were maximal.
“Whether these flights were maximal is not known”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Study design and conductown data§ DISCUSSIONThe high power output and work generated by the flight muscles indicate that the recorded flights were likely very close to maximal and performed with similar effort.
“Together, the high power output and work generated by the flight muscles suggest that the flights obtained for each individual were likely very close to maximal, and performed with a similar level of effort.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationreasoning§ DISCUSSIONThe potential costs of the train are not mutually exclusive, each could be subtle and hard to detect, and ultimate fitness costs could arise from their cumulative effect on locomotor performance.
“None of these potential costs are mutually exclusive and all could individually be relatively subtle and difficult to detect: the ultimate fitness costs could be the result of the cumulative effect of each of these factors on locomotor performance.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).
Premisenone given§ DISCUSSIONSeveral other sexually selected traits have been reported to have rather subtle effects on bird locomotor performance.
“There are several other examples of sexually selected traits having rather subtle effects on bird locomotor performance.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
Study design and conductown data§ Comparative and statistical analysesFlight performance variables and aerodynamic power components were compared using paired t-tests with Bonferroni-Holm correction for multiple comparisons.
“Flight performance variables and aerodynamic power components were analysed using paired t-tests with significance levels adjusted using the Bonferroni-Holm correction for multiple comparisons.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.
Study design and conductreasoning§ DISCUSSIONThe flights took place in a familiar flight arena using captive-bred birds, conditions that could potentially compromise performance.
“The flights were performed in a flight arena with which the birds were familiar, using captive-bred birds.These are conditions that could potentially compromise performance.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationcitation§ DISCUSSIONAlthough added mass must affect induced power requirements, the size of that effect has little meaningful functional relevance given the high variability in individual take-off performance.
“Together, these findings suggest that although added mass must affect the induced power requirements, the magnitude of the effect has little meaningful functional relevance (given the high variability in individual take-off performance per se; Table 2, Fig. 1A) (Macleod, 2006).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Macleod, 2006 source
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductcitation§ Flight arena and filming set-upThe flight arena volume was calibrated using the direct linear transformation method.
“The flight arena volume was calibrated using the direct linear transformation method (Hedrick, 2008).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Hedrick, 2008 source
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
Study design and conductnone given§ Kinematic and aerodynamic analysis of flightFor each bird, the flight with the highest centre-of-mass power in each treatment was selected for statistical comparison because differences are most likely to appear during maximal effort.
“For each individual, the flight with the highest P CoM for the two treatments was selected for statistical comparisons, as any potential differences in performance are most likely to be apparent during maximal effort flights.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).
Premisenone given§ ConclusionsThe peacock's train is often cited as a classic example of a costly product of sexual selection.
“The peacock's train is often cited as a classic example of a 'costly' product of sexual selection.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisecitation§ DISCUSSIONVertical display flights by collared doves have been estimated to incur a relatively low metabolic cost of about 5% of basal metabolic rate.
“The vertical display flights performed by collared doves (Streptopelia decaocto) have been estimated to incur a relatively low metabolic cost (~5% of basal metabolic rate) (Usherwood, 2008).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Usherwood, 2008 source
May combine two claims.
Study design and conductcitation§ DISCUSSIONThe work output from the flight muscles, 66 J/kg, was close to total mechanical work during take-off in common raven and Harris hawks and close to the maximum work predicted for skeletal muscle.
“The work output from the muscles (66 J kg -1 ) is also close to the total mechanical work required from the muscles during take-off flights in common raven [48 J kg -1 (Jackson and Dial, 2011)] and Harris hawks [56 J kg -1 (Askew et al., 2001)], and close to the maximum work skeletal muscles are predicted to be capable of generating (Peplowski and Marsh, 1997).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checkedMay combine two claims.
Interpretationown data§ RESEARCH ARTICLEAny costs of possessing an ornate train are small and have limited meaningful functional significance for take-off performance.
“any such costs are small with limited meaningful functional significance to take-off performance.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
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?
Askew found that the train did not reduce take off flight performance in peacocks.
“Recently, Askew19 found that the train did not reduce take off flight performance”
From The peacock train does not handicap cursorial locomotor performance (2016) · cites this paper as [19]
There is a surprising lack of evidence to support the idea that locomotion in peacocks is in some way affected by sexually selected traits.
“However, there is a surprising lack of evidence to support the idea that locomotion in peacocks is in some way affected by sexually selected traits19.”
From The peacock train does not handicap cursorial locomotor performance (2016) · cites this paper as [19]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Train aerodynamic power differs between text and Table 2
MinorThe text reports mean aerodynamic power with a train as 414.1 W kg−1, while Table 2 reports 414.3 W kg−1 for the same condition.
“train P aero =414.1±31.2W kg -1”
“P aero =P CoM +P' ind +P pro +P par (W kg -1 ) 414.3±31.2393.3±27.1 t 4 =0.55,ns”
Cites
The descent of man and selection in relation to sex
チャールス, ダ., & 茂穂, 田. (1907) · Tokyo Jinrui Gakkai zasshi · doi:10.1537/ase1887.22.495 · Cited by 10,909 · see citing works
Andersson, M. (1994) · Princeton University Press eBooks · doi:10.1515/9780691207278 · Cited by 7,911 · see citing works
Mate selection—A selection for a handicap
Zahavi, A. (1975) · Journal of Theoretical Biology · doi:10.1016/0022-5193(75)90111-3 · Cited by 5,251 · see citing works
The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex
Darwin, C. R. (1872) · D. Appleton and company eBooks · doi:10.5962/bhl.title.2112 · Cited by 2,440 · see citing works
The lek paradox and the capture of genetic variance by condition dependent traits
(1996) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.1996.0207 · Cited by 1,461 · see citing works
Hedrick, T. L. (2008) · Bioinspiration & Biomimetics · doi:10.1088/1748-3182/3/3/034001 · Cited by 1,360 · see citing works
Pennycuick, C. J. (1975) · Avian Biology · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-249405-5.50009-4 · Cited by 1,072 · see citing works
Female choice selects for extreme tail length in a widowbird
Andersson, M. (1982) · Nature · doi:10.1038/299818a0 · Cited by 973 · see citing works
A re-examination of the relation between standard metabolic rate and body weight in birds
Lasiewski, R. C., & Dawson, W. R. (1967) · The Condor · doi:10.2307/1366368 · Cited by 816 · see citing works
ENERGETICS OF FREE-RANGING MAMMALS, REPTILES, AND BIRDS
Nagy, K. A., Girard, I. A., & Brown, T. K. (1999) · Annual Review of Nutrition · doi:10.1146/annurev.nutr.19.1.247 · Cited by 806 · see citing works
Good-genes effects in sexual selection
Møller, A. P., & Alatalo, R. V. (1999) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.1999.0607 · Cited by 533 · see citing works
Improved growth and survival of offspring of peacocks with more elaborate trains
Petrie, M. (1994) · Nature · doi:10.1038/371598a0 · Cited by 461 · see citing works
Costs of sexual traits: a mismatch between theoretical considerations and empirical evidence
Kotiaho, J. S. (2001) · Biological reviews/Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · doi:10.1017/s1464793101005711 · Cited by 437 · see citing works
Peahens prefer peacocks with elaborate trains
Petrie, M., Tim, H., & Carolyn, S. (1991) · Animal Behaviour · doi:10.1016/s0003-3472(05)80484-1 · Cited by 422 · see citing works
The energetic cost of feather synthesis is proportional to basal metabolic rate
Lindström, Å., Visser, G. H., & Daan, S. (1993) · Physiological Zoology · doi:10.1086/physzool.66.4.30163805 · Cited by 380 · see citing works
A New Approach to Animal Flight Mechanics
Rayner, J. M. V. (1979) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.80.1.17 · Cited by 351 · see citing works
Witter, M. S., Cuthill, I. C., & Bonser, R. H. C. (1994) · Animal Behaviour · doi:10.1006/anbe.1994.1227 · Cited by 309 · see citing works
Dragonfly Flight: III. Lift and Power Requirements
Wakeling, J. M., & Ellington, C. P. (1997) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.200.3.583 · Cited by 219 · see citing works
Patterns of variation in tail ornament size in birds
Alatalo, R. V., Höglund, ., & Lundberg, A. (1988) · Biological Journal of the Linnean Society · doi:10.1111/j.1095-8312.1988.tb01969.x · Cited by 200 · see citing works
Aerodynamics and the evolution of long tails in birds
Balmford, A. P., Thomas, A. L. R., & Jones, I. L. (1993) · Nature · doi:10.1038/361628a0 · Cited by 185 · see citing works
Peplowski, M. M., & Marsh, R. L. (1997) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.200.22.2861 · Cited by 167 · see citing works
Experimental and natural changes in the peacock's (Pavo cristatus) train can affect mating success
Petrie, M., & Halliday, T. R. (1994) · Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology · doi:10.1007/bf00167962 · Cited by 155 · see citing works
Escape responses by redshanks, Tringa totanus, on attack by avian predators
Cresswell, W. R. (1993) · Animal Behaviour · doi:10.1006/anbe.1993.1231 · Cited by 139 · see citing works
Evans, M. R., & Thomas, A. L. R. (1992) · Animal Behaviour · doi:10.1016/s0003-3472(05)80229-5 · Cited by 133 · see citing works
Estimating power curves of flying vertebrates
Rayner, J. M. V. (1999) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.202.23.3449 · Cited by 130 · see citing works
Askew, G. N., Marsh, R. L., & Ellington, C. P. (2001) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.204.21.3601 · Cited by 123 · see citing works
Self-citationMultiple sexual advertisements honestly reflect health status in peacocks (Pavo cristatus)
Loyau, A., Jalme, M. S., Cagniant, C., & Sorci, G. (2005) · Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology · doi:10.1007/s00265-005-0958-y · Cited by 120 · see citing works
Empirical Estimates of Body Drag of Large Waterfowl and Raptors
Pennycuick, C. J., Obrecht, H. H., & Fuller, M. R. (1988) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.135.1.253 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
Compensatory traits and the evolution of male ornaments
Swallow, J., & Husak, J. (2011) · Behaviour · doi:10.1163/000579510x541265 · Cited by 97 · cited 2× · see citing works
“…a negative affect on organismal performance, it is an indicator of overall superior genetic quality and therefore has a net positive effect on fitness [e.g. fecundity or offspring success (Petrie, 1994; Rowe and Houle, 1996; Möller and Alatalo, 1999; Hale et al., 2009; Husak and Swallow, 2011)].”
BackgroundMuscle designed for maximum short-term power output: quail flight muscle
Askew, G. N., & Marsh, R. L. (2002) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.205.15.2153 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
Self-citationMarsh, R. L., Ellerby, D. J., Henry, H. T., & Rubenson, J. (2006) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.02226 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
The Strength of the Pigeon’s Wing Bones in Relation to Their Function
Pennycuick, C. J. (1967) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.46.2.219 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
Flight costs of long, sexually selected tails in hummingbirds
Clark, C. J., & Dudley, R. (2009) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2009.0090 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
Scaling of mechanical power output during burst escape flight in the Corvidae
Jackson, B. E., & Dial, K. P. (2011) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.046789 · Cited by 63 · cited 4× · see citing works
“Whether these flights were maximal is not known; however, the total power is close to the maximal power reported in other species [395 W kg−1 in magpie, 350 W kg−1 in grey jay (Jackson and Dial, 2011); 390 W kg−1 in blue breasted quail (Askew et al.”
BackgroundInfluentialDesign methodology and performance of an indraft wind tunnel
Johl, G., Passmore, M., & Render, P. M. (2004) · The Aeronautical Journal · doi:10.1017/s0001924000000282 · Cited by 55 · see citing works
Is the peacock’s train an honest signal of genetic quality at the major histocompatibility complex?
Hale, M. L., VERDUIJN, M. H., Møller, A. P., et al. (2009) · Journal of Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1420-9101.2009.01746.x · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Mondal, K., Gupta, S., Qureshi, Q., & Sankar, K. (2011) · Mammalia · doi:10.1515/mamm.2011.011 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Harikrishnan, S., Vasudevan, K., & Sivakumar, K. (2010) · The Open Ornithology Journal · doi:10.2174/1874453201003010013 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Why does diurnal mass change not appear to affect the flight performance of alarmed birds?
Macleod, R. (2006) · Animal Behaviour · doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.04.020 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Morris, C. R., & Askew, G. N. (2010) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.035709 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Self-citationUsherwood, J. R. (2008) · Journal of Avian Biology · doi:10.1111/j.0908-8857.2008.04347.x · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Usherwood, J. R. (2007) · Journal of Avian Biology · doi:10.1111/j.2007.0908-8857.04347.x
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 43 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Hoyo, 1994, Handbook of Birds of the World
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Handicap Principle: how an erroneous hypothesis became a scientific principle
Penn, D. J., & Számadó, S. (2019) · Biological reviews/Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · doi:10.1111/brv.12563 · Cited by 111 · see citing works
“very costly to produce (Borgia, 1993, 1996; McCarty, 1996; Moreno-Rueda, 2007; McCullough & Emlen, 2013; Askew, 2014; Thavarajah et al., 2016; Guimarães et al., 2017). These are only a few of the many studies that report inconsistent findings, and moreover there is no evidence that signals are honest because they are…”
BackgroundInfluentialThe wings before the bird: an evaluation of flapping-based locomotory hypotheses in bird antecedents
Dececchi, T. A., Larsson, H. C. E., & Habib, M. B. (2016) · PeerJ · doi:10.7717/peerj.2159 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
“A similar pattern is seen in both late Stage II WAIR Chukars and in juvenile Peafowl.”
BackgroundInfluentialCost of flight and the evolution of stag beetle weaponry
Goyens, J., Wassenbergh, S. V., Dirckx, J., & Aerts, P. (2015) · Journal of The Royal Society Interface · doi:10.1098/rsif.2015.0222 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
Somjee, U. (2021) · BioEssays · doi:10.1002/bies.202000183 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
“9% of bodymass, and does not measurably decrease performance or increase energy expenditure during flight.[68,107] In contrast, males of the relatively unassuming Eastern kingbird (b, right), Tyrannus tyrannus, invest a surprising 30%more in pectoral muscle mass compared to females.”
BackgroundDarwin Versus Wallace: Esthetic Evolution and Preferential Mate Choice
Davis, A. C., & Arnocky, S. A. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.862385 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
“The long, elaborate peacock train also does not appear to reduce locomotor performance (Askew, 2014).”
BackgroundThe peacock train does not handicap cursorial locomotor performance
Thavarajah, N. K., Tickle, P. G., Nudds, R. L., & Codd, J. R. (2016) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep36512 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Condition-dependent trade-offs maintain honest signalling
Számadó, S., Samu, F., & Takács, K. (2022) · Royal Society Open Science · doi:10.1098/rsos.220335 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
“For example, recent studies found that the flagship example of the Handicap Principle, the peacock’s train, does not handicap the locomotion of peacocks [80,81].”
ResultHonesty in signalling games is maintained by trade-offs rather than costs
Számadó, S., Zachar, I., Czégel, D., & Penn, D. J. (2023) · BMC Biology · doi:10.1186/s12915-022-01496-9 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
“The train does not hinder movement [56]; on the contrary, males with longer trains are able to take-off faster than males with shorter ones [57].”
BackgroundOrd, T. J., Blazek, K. D., White, T. E., et al. (2021) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2021.0706 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
“Nonetheless, new evidence suggests peacock locomotion is not impeded by the train [10,11] nor are males disproportionally predated upon in the wild [12].”
BackgroundCan Sex-Specific Metabolic Rates Provide Insight into Patterns of Metabolic Scaling?
Somjee, U., Shankar, A., & Falk, J. J. (2022) · Integrative and Comparative Biology · doi:10.1093/icb/icac135 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
The metabolic cost of carrying a sexually selected trait in the male fiddler crabUca pugilator
Tullis, A., & Straube, C. H. T. (2017) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.163816 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
“…demonstrate no decline in performance (green swordtail, Xiphophorus helleri: Royle et al., 2006, Baumgartner et al., 2011; rhinoceros beetle, Trypoxylus dichotomus: McCullough et al., 2012; threadfin rainbow fish, Iriatherina werneri: Trappett et al., 2013; peafowl, Pavo cristatus: Askew, 2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialHow conspicuous are peacock eyespots and other colorful feathers in the eyes of mammalian predators?
Kane, S. A., Wang, Y., Fang, R., Lu, Y., & Dakin, R. (2019) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0210924 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
“, 2015), flight (Askew, 2014), fighting with their sharp spurs (Petrie et al.”
BackgroundEvomimetics: the biomimetic design thinking 2.0
Adriaens, D. (2019) · SPIE Bioinspiration, Biomimetics, and Bioreplication · doi:10.1117/12.2514049 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Sowersby, W., Eckerström‐Liedholm, S., Rowiński, P. K., Balogh, J., Eiler, S. M., Upstone, J. D., González‐Voyer, A., & Rogell, B. (2021) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/evo.14358 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
The sexual selection of creativity: A nomological approach
Novaes, F. C., & Natividade, J. C. (2023) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.874261 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
“Effective fitness indicators are costly and wasteful, like a peacock’s plumage (Miller, 2000; Møller and Petrie, 2002; Askew, 2014; Thavarajah et al., 2016).”
BackgroundInfluentialSimpson, R. K., & McGraw, K. J. (2018) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/evo.13662 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
“…recent work on peacocks, hummingbirds, and rhinoceros beetles (Trypoxylus dichotomus) found that longer, and theoretically more unwieldy, tails/horns do not negatively impact various aspects of flight (Clark and Dudley 2009; McCullough et al. 2012; Askew 2014), potentially dismissing this idea.”
BackgroundSzámadó, S., Zachar, I., & Penn, D. J. (2025) · Journal of Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1093/jeb/voaf144 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Sexual selection does not drive hindwing tail elaboration in a moon moth,Actias luna
Rubin, J. J., & Kawahara, A. Y. (2023) · Behavioral Ecology · doi:10.1093/beheco/arad019 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
“For instance, the peacock’s tail does not seem to pose a measurable locomotor deficit (Askew 2014; Thavarajah et al. 2016).”
The evolution of language by sexual selection
Worden, R. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1060510 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Color variation and visual modeling provide no support for adaptive coloration in a blue crayfish
Graham, Z. A., & Avery, J. D. (2025) · Behavioral Ecology · doi:10.1093/beheco/araf063 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Development of Domestic Fowl Locomotion over Inclined Surfaces and Use of Anticipation Strategies
LeBlanc, C. (2016) · The Atrium (University of Guelph) · Cited by 2 · see citing works
The trade-offs of honest and dishonest signalsPreprint
Számadó, S., Zachar, I., & Penn, D. J. (2023) · doi:10.32942/x2960g · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Take-off with train is no drag for peacocks
Knight, K. (2014) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.112342
The trade-offs of honest and dishonest signalsPreprint
Zachar, I., & Penn, D. J. (2023) · doi:10.32942/x2qc8z
- Authors
- Askew, G. N.
- Affiliations
- University of Leeds (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Askew, Graham N.
- ORCID
- Askew, Graham N.
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Biology
- Publisher
- The Company of Biologists
- Published
- 2014-09-15
- Volume
- 217
- Issue
- 18
- Pages
- 3237-3241
- ISSN
- 0022-0949 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-9145
- OpenAlex
- W2142727208
- Cited by
- 26
- References
- 43
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 2.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Experimental Biology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Loughborough University
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Biomimetic flight and propulsion mechanisms
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Avian ecology and behavior
- Keywords
- peacock, Pavo cristatus, plumage, sexual selection, aerodynamic drag, parasite drag, induced power, body weight, locomotor performance, energy expenditure
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Biomechanical Phenomena, Feathers, Flight, Animal, Male, Sex Characteristics, Galliformes
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.
Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-09.
Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-09.
Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.
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