大山雀身体大小的性二态及其季节变化
作者:
作者单位:

北京林业大学生态与自然保护学院

基金项目:

国家重点研发计划项目(No. 2017YFC1403500),国家自然科学基金项目(No. 31970421)


Sexual Size Dimorphism and Its Seasonal Variation in Cinereous Tit Parus cinereus
Author:
Affiliation:

School of Ecology and Nature Conservation, Beijing Forestry University

  • 摘要
  • | |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献 [1]
  • |
  • 相似文献 [20]
  • | | |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    动物中普遍存在雌雄个体身体大小的性二态现象。了解近缘种之间身体大小性二态现象的差异,可为深入探讨身体大小性二态现象的潜在驱动机制提供证据。国外对欧亚大山雀(Parus major)的研究发现,其喙长、跗跖长、翅长等6项身体大小指标存在着明显的性二态,且喙长的性二态存在季节间差异。大山雀(P. cinereus)曾被作为欧亚大山雀的一个亚种,其形态和行为与欧亚大山雀存在着诸多相似之处。为探讨大山雀是否也存在身体大小性二态及季节性差异,本研究分析了2018至2020年间在河南董寨国家级自然保护区捕捉的226只(雌性96只和雄性130只)大山雀的喙长、头喙长、跗跖长、翅长、尾长和体长这6项体征指标的两性差异及其季节变化。结果显示,大山雀上述6项身体大小指标均存在不同程度的性二态现象,且雄性个体仅喙长与雌性的差异不显著,其余5项指标均显著大于雌性。此外,身体大小指标的两性差异不随季节显著变化,但两性的跗跖长在秋季均显著短于冬季和繁殖季,尾长在繁殖季均显著长于秋季和冬季。上述结果表明,大山雀身体大小的性二态及其季节性差异与欧亚大山雀并不完全相似。无论其身体大小存在性二态和季节变化的原因,还是其与欧亚大山雀在身体大小性二态模式上的差别,都有待今后进一步研究。

    Abstract:

    Sexual size dimorphism is common in animals. Understanding the differences in sexual dimorphism of body size between closely related species could provide evidence for insight into the underlying mechanisms driving sexual dimorphism of body size. Previous studies on Great Tit (Parus major) and many other birds have reported obvious sexual size dimorphism in morphometric traits such as bill length, tarsus length and wing length, and that the sexual size dimorphism of bill length of Great Tit may vary by seasons. The Cinereous Tit (P. cinereus) was once regarded as a subspecies of the Great Tit and it is similar to the Great Tit in various aspects of morphology and behaviors. Aiming to provide supplementary information about the interspecific difference in sexual size dimorphism between closely related species, we explored sexual and seasonal differences of Cinereous Tit in six morphometric traits including bill length, bill-head length, tarsus length, wing length, tail length and body length. From 2018 to 2020, a total of 226 individuals (96 females and 130 males) were captured in the Dongzhai National Nature Reserve of Henan Province, China. The relationships of each of the above morphometric traits with sex and season were analyzed using linear mixed models, in which each morphometric trait was treated as the dependent variable, and sex, season and their interaction as explanatory variables. Moreover, as there were three persons who attended the measurements of the birds, person ID was treated as a random factor to account for inter-person differences in measurements. The results showed that there were different degrees of sexual size dimorphism among the six morphological traits (Table 1), and the males were significantly larger than the females in all traits except bill length which showed no significant differences between the sexes. Moreover, seasonal variation was found for tarsus length and tail length: the tarsus length in autumn was significantly shorter than that in winter and breeding season, while the tail length in breeding season was significantly longer than that in autumn and winter. Despite of the seasonal differences in bill length and tail length, the sexual differences in the six morphological measurements did not significantly change with seasons. These results suggest that the patterns of sexual size dimorphism and seasonal differences of morphological traits of the Cinereous Tit are not same as those of the Great Tit. Future studies are warranted to investigate the reasons for the existence of sexual size dimorphism and seasonal variation of morphological traits in Cinereous Tit as well as the reasons for the inter-specific differences in sexual size dimorphism and seasonal patterns.

    参考文献
    Andersson M. 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Barve S, Dixit S, Dhondt A A. et al. 2017. Sexual dimorphism in breast stripe width and beak eco-morphology in Himalayan Green-backed Tits (Parus monticolus). Avian Biology Research, 10(4): 259–263. Bibi N, Wei Y, Xu H, et al. 2019. Personality is associated with dominance in a social feeding context in the great tit. Behaviour, 156(13/14): 1419–1434. Bouwhuis S, Quinn J L, Sheldon B C, et al. 2014. Personality and basal metabolic rate in a wild bird population. Oikos, 123(1): 56–62. Bouwhuis S, Sheldon B C, Verhulst S. 2011. Basal metabolic rate and the rate of senescence in the great tit. Functional Ecology, 25(4): 829–838. Cox R M, Calsbeek R. 2009. Sexually antagonistic selection, sexual dimorphism, and the resolution of intralocus sexual conflict. American Naturalist, 173(2): 176–187. Dale J, Dunn P O, Figuerola J, et al. 2007. Sexual selection explains Rensch's rule of allometry for sexual size dimorphism. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B: Biological Sciences, 274(1628): 2971–2979. Ebenman B. 1986. Sexual size dimorphism in the great tit Parus major in relation to the number of coexisting congeners. Oikos, 47(3): 355–359. Fairbairn D J. 1997. Allometry for sexual size dimorphism: pattern and process in the coevolution of body size in males and females. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 28(1): 659–687. Fan Q, E M, Wei Y, et al. 2021. Mate choice in double-breeding female Great Tits (Parus Major): Good males or compatible males. Animals, 11(1): 140. Fleagle J G, Kay R F, Simons E L. 1980. Sexual dimorphism in early anthropoids. Nature, 287(5780): 328–330. Fox A D, King R, Watkin J. 1992. Seasonal variation in weight, body measurements and condition of free-living Teal. Bird Study, 39(1): 53–62. Francis I S, Fox A D, McCarthy J P, et al. 1991. Measurements and moult of the Lapland Bunting Calcarius lapponicus in West Greenland. Ringing & Migration, 12(1): 28–37. Gosler A. 1987a. Pattern and process in the bill morphology of the Great Tit Parus major. Ibis, 129(suppl 2): 451–476. Gosler A. 1987b. Sexual dimorphism in the summer bill-length of the Great Tit. Ardea, 75(1): 91–98. Gosler A. 1987c. Some Aspects of Bill Morphology in Relation to Ecology in the Great Tit Parus major. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Greenberg R, Danner R M. 2013. Climate, ecological release and bill dimorphism in an island songbird. Biology Letters, 9(3): 20130118. Greenberg R, Danner R, Olsen B, et al. 2012. High summer temperature explains bill size variation in salt marsh sparrows. Ecography, 35(2): 146–152. H?rak P, Ots I, Vellau H, et al. 2001. Carotenoid-based plumage coloration reflects hemoparasite infection and local survival in breeding great tits. Oecologia, 126(2): 166–173. Isaksson C, Ornborg J, Prager M, et al. 2008. Sex and age differences in reflectance and biochemistry of carotenoid-based colour variation in the great tit Parus major. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 95(4): 758–765. Koz?owski J. 1989. Sexual size dimorphism: a life history perspective. Oikos, 54(2): 253–255. Li J, Wang N, Wang Y, et al. 2010. Sexual size dimorphism and sex identification using morphological traits of two Aegithalidae species. Zoological Science, 27(12): 946–951. Liao W B, Liu W C, Meril? J. 2015. Andrew meets Rensch: sexual size dimorphism and the inverse of Rensch’s rule in Andrew’s toad (Bufo andrewsi). Oecologia, 177(2): 389–399. Liu P, Sun Y. 2016. Sexual size dimorphism and assortative mating in Elliot's Laughingthrush Trochalopteron elliotii. Ardea, 104(2): 177–181. Liu P, Sun Y. 2018. Sexual size dimorphism and assortative mating in the Plain Laughingthrush (Garrulax davidi concolor). The Wilson Journal of Ornithology, 130(2): 510–515. Lovich J E, Gibbons J W. 1992. A review of techniques for quantifying sexual size dimorphism. Growth, Development and Aging, 56(4): 269–281. Lumley T, Diehr P, Emerson S, et al. 2002. The importance of the normality assumption in large public health data sets. Annual Review of Public Health, 23(1): 151–169. Matthysen E, Dhondt A A, Adriaensen F. 1991. Sexual dimorphism in bill length and breeding success in Great and Blue Tits (Parus major, P. caeruleus). Ornis Scandinavica, 22(2): 171–173. Morrison M L, Rodewald A D, Voelker G, et al. 2018. Ornithology: Foundation, Analysis, and Application. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Mueller H C. 1990. The evolution of reversed sexual dimorphism in size in monogamous species of birds. Biological Review, 65(4): 553–585 Navalón G, Bright J A, Marugán-Lobón J, et al. 2019. The evolutionary relationship among beak shape, mechanical advantage, and feeding ecology in modern birds. Evolution, 73(3): 422–435. Olsen A M. 2017. Feeding ecology is the primary driver of beak shape diversification in waterfowl. Functional Ecology, 31(10): 1985–1995. Owens I P F, Hartley I R. 1998. Sexual dimorphism in birds: why are there so many different forms of dimorphism? Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B: Biological Sciences, 265(1394): 397–407. Raihani G, Szekely T, Serrano-Meneses M A, et al. 2006. The influence of sexual selection and male agility on sexual size dimorphism in bustards (Otididae). Animal Behaviour, 71(4): 833–838. Ringsby T H, S?ther B-E, Solberg E J. 1998. Factors affecting juvenile survival in house sparrow Passer domesticus. Journal of Avian Biology, 29(3): 241–247. Samuk K, Iritani D, Schluter D. 2014. Reversed brain size sexual dimorphism accompanies loss of parental care in white sticklebacks. Ecology and Evolution, 4(16): 3236–3243. Shine R. 1978. Sexual size dimorphism and male combat in snakes. Oecologia, 33(3): 269–277. Shine R. 1989. Ecological causes for the evolution of sexual dimorphism: a review of the evidence. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 64(4): 419–461. Starostová Z, Kubi?ka L, Kratochvíl L. 2010. Macroevolutionary pattern of sexual size dimorphism in geckos corresponds to intraspecific temperature-induced variation. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 23(4): 670–677. Tattersall G J, Arnaout B, Symonds M R. 2017. The evolution of the avian bill as a thermoregulatory organ. Biological Reviews, 92(3): 1630–1656. Temeles E J, Pan I L, Brennan J L, et al . 2000. Evidence for ecological causation of sexual dimorphism in a hummingbird. Science, 289(5478): 441–443. Vanpé C, Kjellander P, Galan M, et al. 2007. Mating system, sexual dimorphism, and the opportunity for sexual selection in a territorial ungulate. Behavioral Ecology, 19(2): 309–316. Wang N, Li J, Liu Y, et al. 2010. Improvement on molecular sex identification primers for Passeriform bird species. Chinese Birds, 1(1): 65–69. Webster M S. 1997. Extreme sexual size dimorphism, sexual selection, and the foraging ecology of Montezuma oropendolas. Auk, 114(4): 570–580. Wei L, Pape M A, Gunnar S B, et al. 2016. Geographic variation in egg ejection rate by great tits across 2 continents. Behavioral Ecology, 27(5): 1405–1412. Zar J H. 2010. Biostatistical Analysis. 5th ed. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall. 蔡其侃. 1987. 北京鸟类志. 北京: 北京出版社. 陈绍勇, 毕俊怀, 何志超, 等. 2015. 鄂尔多斯丽斑麻蜥两性异形及繁殖输出. 动物学杂志, 50(2): 214–220. 柯雯丹, 杨晓菁. 2015. 武汉地区大山雀(Parus major minor)对major与minor亚种组鸣唱回放的差别反应. 动物学杂志, 50(1): 41–51. 李桂垣, 郑宝赉, 刘光佐. 1982. 中国动物志: 鸟纲 第十三卷 雀形目(山雀科—绣眼鸟科). 北京: 科学出版社, 5–15. 李仕泽, 宋志红, 梁芬, 等. 2019. 繁殖期雷山髭蟾性二态分析及求偶鸣声初探. 贵阳学院学报: 自然科学版, 14(2): 104–110. 阮祥锋. 2011. 董寨鸟类图鉴. 郑州: 河南文艺出版社. 施林强, 张秀琴, 马小梅. 2011. 泽陆蛙 (Fejervarya limnocharis)两性异形的个体发育和雌体繁殖. 生态学杂志, 30(4): 717–723. 史红全, 柏军鹏, 范俊功. 2021. 麻雀身体大小的性二态和基于身体量度的性别判定. 四川动物, 40(3): 261–269. 宋朝枢, 瞿文元. 1996. 董寨鸟类自然保护区科学考察集. 北京: 中国林业出版社. 万冬梅, 刘亚男, 张雷, 等. 2017. 山雀类洞巢鸟对不同巢口大小人工巢箱的选择研究. 辽宁大学学报: 自然科学版, 44(1): 45–50. 万丽霞, 张海军, 李海娇. 2018. 甘肃密点麻蜥三个地理种群的两性异形研究. 四川动物, 37(2): 139–148. 王爱真, 鲁国元, 刘苏觅, 等. 2014. 青海西宁大山雀的鸣唱模式分析. 四川动物, 33(1): 45–50. 王海涛, 尹大科, 张安莉, 等. 2019. 三种次级洞巢鸟对巢洞洞口的选择与生态适应. 东北师大学报: 自然科学版, 51(1): 103–107. 夏灿玮, 张雁云. 2016. 四种鸣禽个体间曲目的差异与领域维持时间的Meta分析. 动物学杂志, 51(3): 353–362. 姚冲学, 王智红, 王方, 等. 2020. 饰纹姬蛙的两性异形及雌性繁殖能力. 动物学杂志, 55(3): 317–322. 由玉岩, 杜江峰, 邓秋香, 等. 2013. 巢址因子对大山雀繁殖成功的影响. 东北师大学报: 自然科学版, 45(4): 103–106. 约翰·马敬能, 卡伦·菲利普斯, 何芬奇. 2000. 中国鸟类野外手册. 长沙: 湖南教育出版社. 曾煜, 李贺, 逯金瑶, 等. 2020. 两种鹎科鸟类的性别鉴定. 野生动物学报, 41(4): 131–140. 张维, 刘宇, 左斌, 等. 2009. 人工巢箱条件下大山雀的窝卵数与繁殖成功的关系. 东北林业大学学报, 37(3): 69–71. 赵正阶. 2001. 中国鸟类志: 下卷 雀形目. 长春: 吉林科学技术出版社. 郑光美. 2011. 中国鸟类分类与分布名录. 2版. 北京: 科学出版社, 339–340. 郑光美. 2012. 鸟类学. 2版. 北京: 北京师范大学出版社, 19–23. 郑光美. 2017. 中国鸟类分布与分类名录. 3版. 北京: 科学出版社, 204–205. 郑作新. 2002. 中国鸟类系统检索. 3版. 北京: 科学出版社, 269–270.
    引证文献
    网友评论
    网友评论
    分享到微博
    发 布
引用本文

尹江南,余高阳,努尔索力坦·恰汗,胡骞,王悦,李建强.2021.大山雀身体大小的性二态及其季节变化.动物学杂志,56(6):826-835.

复制
文章指标
  • 点击次数:802
  • 下载次数: 5061
  • HTML阅读次数: 0
  • 引用次数: 0
历史
  • 收稿日期:2021-05-04
  • 最后修改日期:2021-09-03
  • 录用日期:2021-08-30
  • 在线发布日期: 2021-12-01
  • 出版日期: 2021-12-20