Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
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 Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Decker, M. D.
Right arrow Articles by Rabenold, K. N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Decker, M. D.
Right arrow Articles by Rabenold, K. N.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1993 International Society for Behavioral Ecology

research-article

Monogamy in black vultures: genetic evidence from DNA fingerprinting

Mark D. Decker, Patricia G. Parker, Dennis J. Minchella and Kerry N. Rabenold

Department of Biological Sciences, Purdue University West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA

Address reprint requests to M. D. Decker, who is now at the Department of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, University of Minnesota, 318 Church Street, SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA P. G. Parker (formerly P. P. Rabenold) is now at the Department of Zoology, The Ohio State University, 1735 Neil Avenue, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.

ABSTRACT

Recent research has indicated that avian mating systems may commonly deviate from monogamy due to extrapair fertilizations (EPFs). Because the majority of avian species have long been considered monogamous, accurate measurement of the frequency of EPFs in a variety of species is important to enhance understanding of the evolution of avian mating systems. We used DNA fingerprinting to investigate the apparently monogamous mating system of black vultures (Coragyps airaius) by assaying parentage within several nuclear families. Monogamy is suggested in black vultures because mated pairs exhibit long-term pair bonding and year-round association, and share incubation and nestling feeding duties equally. Thirtytwo breeders and 36 nestlings representing 16 complete nuclear families were tagged for individual identification and sampled for DNA analysis using 2 restriction enzymes and 3 probes for hypervariable regions. Putative parents were assigned parentage in all cases. We empirically examined the probability of detecting EPFs by comparing nestlings' fingerprints to those of a putative parent and another randomly chosen adult. All putative parents could be assigned with 95%confidence and all outside adults could be similarly excluded. There is therefore no evidence for successful EPFs in this population, indicating a mating system that does not deviate from strict monogamy. The complex social behavior of black vultures may eliminate the opportunity for EPFs due to the prohibition of copulations in the presence of relatives.

Key words: monogamy, parentage, DNA fingerprinting, black vultures.


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
C. Spottiswoode and A. P. Moller
Extrapair paternity, migration, and breeding synchrony in birds
Behav. Ecol., January 1, 2004; 15(1): 41 - 57.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Behav EcolHome page
A. P. Moller and J. J. Cuervo
The evolution of paternity and paternal care in birds
Behav. Ecol., September 1, 2000; 11(5): 472 - 485.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Behav EcolHome page
M. K. Schwartz, D. J. Boness, C. M. Schaeff, P. Majluf, E. A. Perry, and R. C. Fleischer
Female-solicited extrapair matings in Humboldt penguins fail to produce extrapair fertilizations
Behav. Ecol., May 1, 1999; 10(3): 242 - 250.
[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.