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 (5)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Krüger, O.
Right arrow Articles by Davies, N. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Krüger, O.
Right arrow Articles by Davies, N. B.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Behavioral Ecology Vol. 15 No. 2: 210-218
Behavioral Ecology vol. 15 no. 2 © International Society for Behavioral Ecology 2004; all rights reserved

The evolution of egg size in the brood parasitic cuckoos

Oliver Krüger and Nicholas B. Davies

Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, UK

Address correspondence to O. Krüger. E-mail: ok212{at}cam.ac.uk.

We compared genera of nonparasitic cuckoos and two groups of parasitic cuckoos: those raised together with host young ("nonejectors") and those in which the newly hatched cuckoo either ejects the host eggs or chicks, or kills the host young ("ejectors"). Nonejectors are similar to their hosts in body size and parasitize larger hosts than do ejectors, which parasitize hosts much smaller than themselves. In both types of parasite, the cuckoo's egg tends to match the host eggs in size. To achieve this, nonejectors have evolved a smaller egg for their body size than have nonparasitic cuckoos, and ejectors have evolved an even smaller egg. Among ejector cuckoo genera, larger cuckoos have larger eggs relative to the eggs of their hosts, and the relationship between cuckoo egg volume (mass of the newly-hatched cuckoo) and host egg volume (mass to be ejected) did not differ from that predicted by weight-lifting allometry. However, comparing among Cuculus cuckoo species, the allometric slope differed from the predicted, so it is not clear that egg size is related to the need to give the cuckoo chick sufficient strength for ejection. Comparing the two most speciose ejector genera, Chrysococcyx cuckoos (smaller and parasitize dome-nesting hosts) lay eggs more similar in size to their host's eggs than do Cuculus cuckoos (larger and parasitize open cup–nesting hosts). Closer size-matching of host eggs in Chrysococcyx may reflect the following: (1) selection to reduce adult body mass to facilitate entry through small domed nest holes to lay, and (2) less need for a large egg, because longer incubation periods in dome-nesting hosts allow the young cuckoo more time to grow before it need eject host eggs.

Key words: brood parasitism, cuckoo, egg size, host nest architecture.


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
Proc R Soc BHome page
O. Kruger, M. D. Sorenson, and N. B. Davies
Does coevolution promote species richness in parasitic cuckoos?
Proc R Soc B, November 7, 2009; 276(1674): 3871 - 3879.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Behav EcolHome page
M. Broom, G. D. Ruxton, and R. M. Kilner
Host life-history strategies and the evolution of chick-killing by brood parasitic offspring
Behav. Ecol., January 1, 2008; 19(1): 22 - 34.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Phil Trans R Soc BHome page
O. Kruger
Cuckoos, cowbirds and hosts: adaptations, trade-offs and constraints
Phil Trans R Soc B, October 29, 2007; 362(1486): 1873 - 1886.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Proc R Soc BHome page
O Kruger, N.B Davies, and M.D Sorenson
The evolution of sexual dimorphism in parasitic cuckoos: sexual selection or coevolution?
Proc R Soc B, June 22, 2007; 274(1617): 1553 - 1560.
[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.