Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

Problems with Testing Inbreeding Avoidance: The Case of the Collared Flycatcher

Tomas Part
Evolution
Vol. 50, No. 4 (Aug., 1996), pp. 1625-1630
DOI: 10.2307/2410898
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2410898
Page Count: 6
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Download ($4.00)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Problems with Testing Inbreeding Avoidance: The Case of the Collared Flycatcher
Preview not available

Abstract

Four year's data on collared flycatchers, Ficedula albicollis, breeding in a nestbox plot on the island of Gotland, Sweden, was used to investigate whether individuals avoid mating with close kin (i.e., parents or sibs). Only one case of close inbreeding (0.5% of all pairs) was observed during the years of study. The observed frequency of close inbreeding was compared to expected frequencies based on two different null models. Assuming no inbreeding avoidance behaviors (e.g., dispersal or kin recognition), but taking into account the fact that mortality, and different arrival and pairing times of individuals reduce the probability of mating with close kin, the expected frequency of close inbreeding is 10% and 15% for female and male recruits (i.e., born in the study plot), respectively. However, assuming mating to be random within the study plot reduced the expected frequency of close inbreeding to 1% or less for both males and females. Consequently, conclusions drawn concerning inbreeding avoidance depend on the null model used. Contrasting estimated costs of tolerating close inbreeding with those of avoiding it (by dispersal to other plots), however, suggests that the costs of avoiding close inbreeding are substantially greater than those of tolerating it. Therefore, although inbreeding avoidance cannot be rejected as a cause of dispersal of this species, it is not the primary cause, and particularly not for sex-biased dispersal. The general problems of investigating inbreeding avoidance are discussed. It is argued that all previous null models based on random mating in finite populations produce expected frequencies of close inbreeding that in fact include inbreeding avoidance, since they Implicitly assume random dispersal within a finite population. Thus, comparisons between observed and expected frequencies of close inbreeding based on random mating are inadequate. The most promising method of investigating inbreeding avoidance is to experimentally study individual movements and mating preferences in the presence and absence of close kin.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
1625
    1625
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1626
    1626
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1627
    1627
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1628
    1628
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1629
    1629
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1630
    1630