Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Lay Summary
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (7)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ruusila, V.
Right arrow Articles by Runko, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Ruusila, V.
Right arrow Articles by Runko, P.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Behavioral Ecology Vol. 12 No. 6: 686-690
© 2001 International Society for Behavioral Ecology

Costs and benefits of female-biased natal philopatry in the common goldeneye

Vesa Ruusilaa, Hannu Pöysäb and Pentti Runkoc

a Section of Ecology, Department of Biology, University of Turku, FIN-20014 Turku, Finland b Finnish Game and Fisheries Research Institute, Evo Game Research Station, Kaitalammintie 75, FIN-16970 Evo, Finland c Jukolantie 1, 71750 Maaninka, Finland

Address correspondence to V. Ruusila, who is now at the Finnish Game and Fisheries Research Institute, Joensuu Game and Fisheries Research, Kauppakatu 18-20, FIN-80100 Joensuu, Finland. E-mail: vesa.ruusila{at}rktl.fi . Hannu Pöysä is now at the Finnish Game and Fisheries Research Institute, Joensuu Game and Fisheries Research, Kauppakatu 18-20, FIN-80100 Joensuu, Finland.

Sex-biased natal dispersal in long-lived species may result in interactions between parents and mature young of the philopatric sex. To investigate the evolutionary basis of natal philopatry in a noncooperative species, the common goldeneye Bucephala clangula, we studied possible costs and benefits of simultaneous breeding of females and philopatric daughters. We did not find any fitness consequences of a daughter's breeding on their mother's breeding in terms of nest-site selection, body weight, clutch size, hatching date, or hatching success. Our results, therefore, did not support the assumption of the local resource competition hypothesis, that the natally philopatric sex should be more costly to a breeding parent. As possible benefits for daughters returning to their natal area, we tested inheritance of nest sites from mothers and explored whether daughters utilize the presence of their mother by parasitically sneaking into her mother's nest. Daughters' nest-site selection was not associated with the presence of their mothers. A comparison between daughters and control females revealed that daughters chose their nest site closer to their natal nest than expected by nest-site availability alone. Daughters could not expect to inherit a nest site from their mother, and we did not find other indications of cooperation between relatives either. The mother's clutch size did not increase in the year breeding with the daughter, indicating daughters do not parasitize their mother's nest. We suggest that benefits such as decreased nest predation risk associated with nesting close to the natal nest site may be important in the natal philopatric behavior of the species.

Key words: Bucephala clangula, dispersal, kin competition, local resource competition, natal philopatry.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Behav EcolHome page
H. Poysa
Public information and conspecific nest parasitism in goldeneyes: targeting safe nests by parasites
Behav. Ecol., May 1, 2006; 17(3): 459 - 465.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.