1998
DOI: 10.1007/bf01653468
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Low frequency of extra-pair paternity in Common Gulls (Larus canus) as revealed by DNA fingerprinting

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
16
0

Year Published

2000
2000
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
1
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Both partners participate in defending territory, incubation and feeding the young. We lack the data for the frequency of extrapair paternity from our population, but elsewhere it has been reported to occur among 8% of broods (Bukacińska et al ). Both females and males have on average two partners during the breeding life span (Brommer and Rattiste ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…Both partners participate in defending territory, incubation and feeding the young. We lack the data for the frequency of extrapair paternity from our population, but elsewhere it has been reported to occur among 8% of broods (Bukacińska et al ). Both females and males have on average two partners during the breeding life span (Brommer and Rattiste ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…Additive genetic (co)variances (V A and Cov A ) were calculated as twice the (co)variance component of original nest (V Origin and Cov Origin ) because full siblings share 50% of their genes (Lynch and Walsh 1998). Note that extra-pair paternity is very rare in gulls (Bukacinska et al 1998;Gilbert et al 1998). Environmental (co)variances (V E and Cov E ) were equal to the recipient nest component (V Recipient and Cov Recipent ), and phenotypic variances were calculated as the sum of the original nest, recipient nest and residual variance components (V P = V Origin ?…”
Section: Statistical Analysesmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…EPP has been shown to be low (3.6%) in a Polish population of common gulls (Bukaciń ska et al 1998), and such a rate is unlikely to seriously bias estimates of additive genetic (co)variance components (Charmantier & Réale 2005). Furthermore, EPP is particularly unlikely to bias additive genetic estimates for a female trait such as the laying date, because most information stems from the comparisons between mothers and daughters, whose relatedness is not affected by EPP.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%