If you are seeing this message, you may be experiencing temporary network problems. Please wait a few minutes and refresh the page. If the problem persists, you may wish to report it to your local Network Manager.
It is also possible that your web browser is not configured or not able to display style sheets. In this case, although the visual presentation will be degraded, the site should continue to be functional. We recommend using the latest version of Microsoft or Mozilla web browser to help minimise these problems.
Wiley InterScience | ||
![]() Journal of Evolutionary BiologyVolume 19 Issue 2, Pages 618 - 624 Published Online: 3 Oct 2005 Journal compilation © 2010 European Society for Evolutionary Biology Published on behalf of the European Society for Evolutionary Biology (ESEB)
Abstract | References | Full Text: HTML, PDF (Size: 109K) | Related Articles | Citation Tracking No evidence for survival selection on carotenoid-based nestling coloration in great tits (Parus major) Copyright 2005 European Society for Evolutionary Biology KEYWORDS carotenoids • plumage coloration • selective pressures • survival selection ABSTRACTIn several vertebrate species evidence supports the hypothesis that carotenoid-based coloration of adults has evolved due to sexual selection. However, in some birds already the nestlings display carotenoid-based coloration. Because the nestling's body plumage is typically moulted before the first reproductive event, sexual selection cannot explain the evolution of these carotenoid-based traits. This suggests that natural selection might be the reason for its evolution. Here we test whether the carotenoid-based nestling coloration of great tits (Parus major) predicts survival after fledging. Contrary to our expectation, the carotenoid-based plumage coloration was not related to short- nor to long-term survival in the studied population. Additionally, no prefledging selection was detectable in an earlier study. This indicates that the carotenoid-based coloration of nestling great tits is currently not under natural selection and it suggests that past selection pressures or selection acting on correlated traits may have led to its evolution. Received 21 April 2005; revised 10 June 2005; accepted 21 June 2005 |