Skip Navigation


Behavioral Ecology Advance Access originally published online on January 19, 2007
Behavioral Ecology 2007 18(2):460-466; doi:10.1093/beheco/arl109
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
18/2/460    most recent
arl109v1
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 (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jeschke, J. M.
Right arrow Articles by Kokko, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Jeschke, J. M.
Right arrow Articles by Kokko, H.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

How partnerships end in guillemots Uria aalge: chance events, adaptive change, or forced divorce?

Jonathan M. Jeschkea,b, Sarah Wanlessc, Michael P. Harrisc and Hanna Kokkoa

a Laboratory of Ecological and Evolutionary Dynamics, Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki, PO Box 65, 00014 Helsinki, Finland b Evolutionary Ecology Unit, Department of Biological and Environmental Science, University of Jyväskylä, Finland c Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Hill of Brathens, Banchory, Kincardineshire AB31 4BW, UK

Address correspondence to J.M. Jeschke. E-mail: jonathan.jeschke{at}gmx.net.


   Abstract

Divorce in socially monogamous species can result from different mechanisms, for example, chance events, active desertion of the partner, or the intrusion of a third individual ousting the partner. We compared the predictions associated with such mechanisms with data from common guillemots (Uria aalge) breeding on the Isle of May, Scotland. The data cover the years 1982–2005 and show a yearly divorce rate of 10.2%. In most divorces (86%), one of the original partners moved to another breeding site, whereas the other bird stayed and bred with a new partner. On average, movers had a significantly lower breeding success after divorce, stayers were largely unaffected, whereas the incoming birds benefited significantly from the change. This pattern fits best the predictions of the "forced-divorce" hypothesis, suggesting that many divorces were caused by incoming birds rather than the original partners or chance events. Although we are unable to document the precise behavioral sequence that led to divorces, our interpretation is supported by observations of frequent fights over breeding-site ownership. Our data also indicate within-population diversity of divorce mechanisms: some divorces were apparently accidental, others desertion of partners and sites if the latter were of low quality. Our study finally illustrates that a negative correlation between breeding success and probability of divorce (which our data show) need not indicate the adaptiveness of divorce for the original partners. Because such a connection has often been made, adaptive divorce may in general be less common than usually assumed.

Key words: auks (Alcidae), common guillemots, common murres, forced divorce, pair-bonds, reunification rate.

Received 4 September 2006; revised 6 December 2006; accepted 17 December 2006.


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




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.