10.5061/dryad.1416
https://zenodo.org/records/5005924
oai:zenodo.org:5005924
Brommer, Jon
Jon
Brommer
Alho, Jussi S
Jussi S
Alho
Biard, Clotilde
Clotilde
Biard
Chapman, Joanne R
Joanne R
Chapman
Charmantier, Anne
Anne
Charmantier
Dreiss, Amelie
Amelie
Dreiss
Hartley, Ian R
Ian R
Hartley
Hjernquist, Mårten B
Mårten B
Hjernquist
Kempenaers, Bart
Bart
Kempenaers
Komdeur, Jan
Jan
Komdeur
Laaksonen, Toni
Toni
Laaksonen
Lehtonen, Paula K
Paula K
Lehtonen
Lubjuhn, Thomas
Thomas
Lubjuhn
Patrick, Samantha C
Samantha C
Patrick
Rosivall, Balazs
Balazs
Rosivall
van Oers, Kees
Kees
van Oers
van der Velde, Marco
Marco
van der Velde
Tinbergen, Joost M
Joost M
Tinbergen
Wilk, Tomasz
Tomasz
Wilk
Winkel, Wolfgang
Wolfgang
Winkel
Data from: Passerine extrapair mating dynamics: a Bayesian modeling approach comparing four species
Zenodo
2010
Ficedula albicollis
Ficedula hypoleuca
Behavior: reproductive
Cyanistes caeruleus
Modeling: ecological
Parus major
Holocene
Ecology: behavioral
2010-04-01
10.1086/653660
https://zenodo.org/communities/dryad
Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal
In many socially monogamous animals, females engage in extrapair copulation (EPC), causing some broods to contain both within‐pair and extrapair young (EPY). The proportion of all young that are EPY varies across populations and species. Because an EPC that does not result in EPY leaves no forensic trace, this variation in the proportion of EPY reflects both variation in the tendency to engage in EPC and variation in the extrapair fertilization (EPF) process across populations and species. We analyzed data on the distribution of EPY in broods of four passerines (blue tit, great tit, collared flycatcher, and pied flycatcher), with 18,564 genotyped nestlings from 2,346 broods in two to nine populations per species. Our Bayesian modeling approach estimated the underlying probability function of EPC (assumed to be a Poisson function) and conditional binomial EPF probability. We used an information theoretical approach to show that the expected distribution of EPC per female varies across populations but that EPF probabilities vary on the above‐species level (tits vs. flycatchers). Hence, for these four passerines, our model suggests that the probability of an EPC mainly is determined by ecological (population‐specific) conditions, whereas EPF probabilities reflect processes that are fixed above the species level.
DataPlottedInFig1.xlsx
Raw data for Figure 1 in original article
RawDataFile.txt
Netherlands
Sweden
Belgium
Hungary
Finland
Poland
United Kingdom
France
Germany