Obtaining Offspring Genetic Material: A New Method for Species With High Nest Predation Rates

Abstract

Over the past decade, the field of moleculargenetics has revolutionized our understanding ofavian mating systems, by demonstrating that socialbonds might not accurately reflect parentagebecause of unknown levels of cryptic mating(e.g., extra-pair copulations). Use ofmolecular genetics tools for paternity analysisrequires genetic material from putative parents andnestlings. Unfortunately, high nest predation ratesoften preclude detailed genetic studies of tropicaltaxa. Here, we describe a nondestructive methodthat increases the efficiency of obtaining geneticmaterial from offspring for a group of tropicalpasserines (Pipridae). The method entailsreplacing eggs with plaster replicas, incubatingeggs artificially, and returning hatchlings totheir original nests for further development. Thismethod greatly improved our ability to sampleoffspring, as we collected genetic material from100% of manipulated nests, compared to52% of unmanipulated nests.

Female mating preferences and offspring survival: testing hypotheses on the genetic basis of mate choice in a wild lekking bird

“…On day 7 (2000) and day 2-3 (2001-2011), a 5 lL blood sample was taken from the brachial vein of each chick. Starting in 2005, one egg from two-egg clutches was artificially incubated, and resultant chicks were blood sampled and returned to the focal nest within 3 h of hatching (Tori et al 2006). If the focal nest failed, incubated eggs were sacrificed before hatching.…”

Extra‐pair paternity correlates with genetic diversity, but not breeding density, in a Neotropical passerine, the black catbird

“…Male black catbirds do invest heavily in nestling care (in one instance, a male fledged two of three young after his mate disappeared several days before fledging; LaPergola 2012), but we lack data on the effect of paternal care on nest predation. To adequately test this hypothesis, one would need to sample all nests, perhaps using incubators and replacement eggs to increase the percentage of broods sampled before nest failure (Tori et al 2006) and to compare EPP levels of successful and unsuccessful nests. Increased sampling by using incubators would also address our concerns regarding sample size.…”

The case of Lepidothrix, Lepidotrix and Neolepidothrix: the importance of the original literature in taxonomic decisions

“…However, Agassiz's name was introduced as an unjustified emendation of Lepitrix Le Peletier de Saint-Fargeau & Serville, 1828 (currently in use for a genus of Scarabeidae Melolonthinae Hopliini beetles, with the emended spelling Lepithrix, see Dalla Torre, 1915). Lepidothrix Bonaparte, 1854 was used as the valid name in at least 25 works by at least 10 authors in the last 50 years over a span of at least 10 years (Prum 1992;Endler & Thery 1996;Thery 1997;Brumfield & Braun 2001;Ridgely & Greenfield 2001;Hilty 2002;Dalgleish & Price 2003;Heindl & Winkler 2003;Snow 2004;Cheviron et al 2005;Ryder & Dures 2005;Engel 2006;Greeney 2006;Restall et al 2006;Sousa 2006;Tori et al 2006;Dures et al 2007;Loiselle et al 2007;Rego et al 2007;Schulenberg et al 2007;Blendinger et al 2008;Buitron-Jurado 2008;Hidalgo et al 2008;Mallet-Rodrigues 2008;Ancies et al 2009;Vanderhoff & Grafton 2009), while Agassiz's name has never been used as a valid name since its creation, and a fortiori since 1899. The requirements of Art.…”