Cited by 92Avian ecology and behaviorComparative Animal Anatomy StudiesMorphological variations and asymmetry

Flightlessness in Steamer-Ducks (Anatidae: tachyeres): Its Morphological Bases and Probable Evolution

Open access
Livezey, Bradley C., Humphrey, Philip S.·1986·Evolution

Abstract

, which result from the large body size and small wing areas of the flightless species. Reduced wing areas of flightless species are related to absolutely shorter remiges, and to relatively or absolutely shortened wing bones, although these reductions differ among species. Reduced lengths of the ulna, radius, and carpometacarpus are associated most strongly with flightlessness. Pectoral muscles and the associated sternal keel are well developed in all species of Tachyeres, largely because of the use of wings in "steaming," an important locomotor behavior. Relative size of these muscles was greatest in largely flighted T. patachonicus; however, sexual dimorphism in wing-loadings results in flightlessness in some males of this species. Proportions in the wing skeleton, intraspecific allometry, and limited data on growth indicate that the relatively short wing bones and remiges of flightless Tachyeres are produced developmentally by a delay in the growth of wing components, and that this heterochrony may underlie, in part, skeletal sexual dimorphism. Increased body size in flightless steamer-ducks is advantageous in territorial defense of food resources and young, and perhaps diving in cold, turbulent water; reductions in wing area probably reflect refinements for wing-assisted locomotion and combat. Flightlessness in steamer-ducks is not related to relaxed predation pressure, but instead was permitted selectively by the year-round habitability of the southern South American coasts. These conditions not only permitted the success of the three flightless species of Tachyeres, but at present may be moving marine populations of T. patachonicus toward flightlessness.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/2408576

Cites

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Most secondarily flightless species in the survey still retain functionally asymmetric primaries.

    “Congruent with the findings of several previous studies [30,31,34], most secondarily flightless species in our survey still retain functionally asymmetric primaries.”

    From Barb geometry of asymmetrical feathers reveals a transitional morphology in the evolution of avian flight (2015) · cites this paper as [31]

    The ‘Morphology of Flightlessness in Tachyeres’ section (page unavailable) reports that flightless steamer-ducks retain the usual number of primary remiges, but it does not describe whether those feathers are asymmetric. Searches for primary-feather asymmetry, vane asymmetry, and symmetrical or asymmetrical flight feathers found no passage addressing that feature or the proportion of flightless species retaining it. (LLM, conf=0.73)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The observed looseness or reduced rigidity in the vanes of flightless taxa is primarily caused by degradation in the microstructure of their interlocking feather barbules.

    “Similarities in primary feather barb geometry between flying and flightless birds support the conclusions of Livezey [31,34], that the observed 'looseness 0 or reduced rigidity in the vanes of flightless taxa is primarily caused by degradation in the microstructure of their interlocking feather barbules.”

    From Barb geometry of asymmetrical feathers reveals a transitional morphology in the evolution of avian flight (2015) · cites this paper as [31]

    The Adaptive Significance of Flightlessness section (page unavailable) describes the remiges of flightless steamer-ducks as shorter and stiffer. The passages found do not address vane looseness or barbule microstructure, so they cannot verify the claimed cause; searches for looseness, vanes, and barbules found no passage on that mechanism. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    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.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 22

  1. Hoffmann and E. O. Wiley made comments on an earlier draft of this paper. We also thank R. Mengel, M. Jenkinson, and their colleagues for preparation of specimens; K. McManness for typing; and M. B. Ibrahim for drafting figures. LITERATURE CITED ALBERCH, P., AND J. ALBERCH. 1981. Heterochronic mechanisms of morphological diversification and evolutionary change in the neotropical salamander, Bolitoglossa occidentalis (Amphibia: Plethodonti- dae). J. Morphol, 167:249-264.
  2. ALEXANDER, R. McN. 1977. Flight, pp. 249-278.
  3. R. MeN. Alexander and G. Go1dspink (eds.), Me- chanics and Energetics of Animal Locomotion.
  4. CUNNINGHAM, R. O. 1871. On some points in the anatomy of the steamer duck (Micropterus cinere- us). Trans. Zooi. Soc. London 7:493-501.
  5. DARWIN, C. 1839. Journal of Researches into the Geology and Natural History of the Various Coun- tries Visited by H. M. S. Beagle, under the Com- mand of Captain Fitzroy, R.N. from 1832-1836.
  6. Colburn, London, U.K. DIXON, W. J., AND M. B. BROWN. 1979. BMDP: Biomedical Computer Programs, P-Series. Univ. California Press, Berkeley.
  7. FEDUCCIA, A. 1980. The Age ofBirds. Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA.
  8. ---. 1977. Ontogeny and Phylogeny. Belknap, Cambridge, MA.
  9. GOULD, S. J., AND R. C. LEWONTIN. 1979. The span- drels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: A critique of the adaptationist programme. Proc. Roy. Soc. London B. 205:581-598.
  10. ---. 1975. The flight of birds. Trans. Amer. Phi- los. Soc. (New Ser.) 65: 1-67.
  11. MACARTHUR, R. H., AND E. O. WILSON. 1967. The Theory of Island Biogeography. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ.
  12. MENDALL, L., A. E. HUTCHINSON, AND R. B. OWEN. 1984. Nesting by injured Common Eiders. Wilson Bull. 96:305-306. Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/evolut/article/40/3/540/6872450 by guest on 31 January 2024
  13. MURPHY, R. C. 1936. Oceanic Birds of South Amer- ica, Vol. 2. Amer. Mus. Natur. Hist., N.Y. NETER, J., AND W. WASSERMAN. 1974. Applied Lin- ear Statistical Methods. Irwin, Homewood, IL.
  14. OWEN, R. 1875. On Diornis (Part XX): Containing a restoration of the skeleton of Cnemiornis calci- trans, Ow., with remarks on its affinities in the la- mellirostral group. Trans. Zool. Soc. London 9:253- 272.
  15. ---. 1879. Memoirs on the extinct wingless birds of New Zealand with an appendix on those of En- gland, Australia, Newfoundland, Mauritius, and Rodriguez (2 vols). John van Voorst, London, U.K. PENNYCUICK, C. J. 1975. Mechanics of flight, pp. 1- 75. In D. S. Farner and J. R. King (eds.), Avian Biology, Vol. 5. Academic Press, N.Y. PIMENTEL, R. A. 1979. Morphometries: The Multi- variate Analysis of Biological Data. Kendall/Hunt, Dubuque, IA.
  16. PROVINE, R. R. 1983. Development ofwing-flapping and flight: A review. Bird Behav. 5:16-21.
  17. SCHMIDT-NIELSEN, K. 1984. Scaling: Why is Animal Size so Important? Cambridge Univ. Press, Cam- bridge, U.K.
  18. SPARKS, J., AND T. SOPER. 1967. Penguins. David & Charles, Newton Abbott, U.K. STORER, R. W. 1960. Evolution in the diving birds, pp. 684-707.
  19. In G. Bergman, K. O. Donner, and L. V. Hoartman (eds.), Proceedings of the XII In- ternational Ornithological Congress, Helsinki, 1958, Vol.
  20. TUCKER, V. A. 1974. Energetics ofnatural avian flight, pp. 298-333.
  21. In R. A. Paynter, Jr. (ed.), Avian En- ergetics. Nuttall Ornithol. Club, Cambridge, MA.
  22. ---. 1980. The Island Waterfowl. Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Livezey, B. C., & Humphrey, P. S.
Affiliations
University of Kansas (US)
Venue
Evolution
Published
1986-05
Volume
40
Issue
3
Pages
540
ISSN
0014-3820 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2321304498
Cited by
92
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
7.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Evolution (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (BSR‐83‐19900, DEB‐17942, 8012403)
  • Yale University
  • University of Kansas
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Avian ecology and behavior
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Comparative Animal Anatomy Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Geometry and Topology › Morphological variations and asymmetry
Keywords
flightlessness, wing reduction, sexual dimorphism, heterochrony, allometry, pectoralis muscle, body size, predation pressure, territorial defense, marine populations

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