Abstract
Timing of breeding is a trait with considerable individual variation, often closely linked to fitness because of seasonal declines in reproduction. The drivers of this variation have received much attention, but how reproductive costs may influence the timing of subsequent breeding has been largely unexplored. We examined a population of northern wheatears Oenanthe oenanthe to compare three groups of individuals that differed in their timing of breeding termination and reproductive effort to investigate how these factors may carry over to influence reproductive timing and reproductive output in the following season. Compared to females that bred successfully, females that put in less effort and terminated breeding early due to nest failure tended to arrive and breed earlier in year 2 (mean advancement = 2.2 and 3.3 d respectively). Females that spent potentially more effort and terminated breeding later due to production of a replacement clutch after nest failure, arrived later than other females in year 2. Reproductive output (number of fledglings) in year 2 differed between the three groups as a result of group‐level differences in the timing of breeding in combination with the general seasonal decline in reproductive output. Our study shows that the main cost of reproduction was apparent in the timing of arrival and breeding in this migratory species. Hence, reproductive costs can arise through altered timing of breeding since future reproductive success (including adult survival) is often dependent on the timing of breeding in seasonal systems.
Highlights
IntroductionReproductive costs may influence subsequent reproductive decisions because reproductive effort can affect individual condition (see ‘carry-over effects’, Norris 2005, Harrison et al 2010), or because the organism is modifying its current reproduction in relation to future reproductive output (Williams 1966, Lessells 1991, Stearns 1992)
Reproductive costs may influence subsequent reproductive decisions because reproductive effort can affect individual condition, or because the organism is modifying its current reproduction in relation to future reproductive output (Williams 1966, Lessells 1991, Stearns 1992)
In seasonal breeders these reproductive costs may be partly driven by constraints operating on the timing of breeding: organisms breeding late in one season may not have enough time to recover their condition before the beginning of the breeding period (Shaw and Levin 2013)
Summary
Reproductive costs may influence subsequent reproductive decisions because reproductive effort can affect individual condition (see ‘carry-over effects’, Norris 2005, Harrison et al 2010), or because the organism is modifying its current reproduction in relation to future reproductive output (Williams 1966, Lessells 1991, Stearns 1992) In seasonal breeders these reproductive costs may be partly driven by constraints operating on the timing of breeding: organisms breeding late in one season may not have enough time to recover their condition before the beginning of the breeding period (Shaw and Levin 2013). The possibility that variation in the timing of breeding can be partly explained by variation in the cost or timing of previous reproductive events has generally not been investigated (but see Nilsson and Svensson 1996, Wiggins et al 1998, Brinkhof et al 2002)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
