Sibling competition has been shown to affect overall growth rates in birds. However, growth consists on the coordinated development of a multitude of structures, and there is ample scope for developmental plasticity and trade-offs among these structures. We would expect that the growth of structures that are used in sibling competition, such as the gape of altricial nestlings, should be prioritized under intense competition. We conducted an experiment in the spotless starling (Sturnus unicolor), cross-fostering nestlings to nests with different levels of sibling competition. We predicted that nestlings subjected to higher levels of sibling competition should develop larger gapes than control birds. We found that, halfway through the nestling period, overall size (a composite index of mass, wing, tarsus and bill) was reduced in nests with intense sibling competition, whereas gape width remained unaffected. At the end of the nestling period, experimental nestlings had wider gapes than controls. Additionally, a correlative study showed that nestling gape width increased when feeding conditions worsened and overall size decreased. These patterns could either be due to increased growth of gape flanges or to delayed reabsorption of this structure. Our results show that birds can invest differentially in the development of organs during growth, and that the growth of organs used in sibling competition is prioritized over structural growth.

20.66±2.08·pg·mg -1 ; medium broods, 15.32±1.94·pg·mg -1 ; and large broods, 14.51±1.66·pg·mg -1 . Additionally, testosterone concentration decreased with laying order, and varied with clutch size in a complex way. Differences in egg testosterone between females exposed to different brood sizes are in line with previous findings in showing that early developmental stress can affect adult reproductive performance, although our study did not detect an effect in other breeding parameters, such as latency to breed or clutch size. Furthermore, the results are consistent with the hypothesis that there is a cost associated with yolk testosterone. However, it is still unclear what the nature of this cost may be, and whether it is paid by females, offspring, or both.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract