No direct fitness benefits of helping in a cooperative breeder despite higher survival of helpers

Jessica Meade and Ben J. Hatchwell

Behavioral Ecology, 2010, vol. 21, issue 6, 1186-1194

Abstract: Helpers in cooperatively breeding species may gain direct fitness benefits that increase their survival probability and/or reproductive success. However, survival and productivity may be influenced by many other factors, including variation in dispersal, nepotistic interactions, or individual condition. High helper survival relative to nonhelpers has been reported in the long-tailed tit Aegithalos caudatus, a cooperative breeder where helpers are failed breeders that redirect care toward kin. Using capture-mark-recapture analysis of a long-term data set, we confirm this result and show that it is not attributable to differential dispersal. Then, using only males with first-order relatives (to control for any effects of nepotism), we investigated the survival of 3 groups of failed breeders (i.e., potential helpers): survival of helpers was highest (61%) but, contrary to predictions based on direct benefits, survival of 2 categories of nonhelpers differed; those with helping opportunities had the lowest survival rate (24%), whereas those without helping opportunities had intermediate survival (52%). We suggest that the groups varied in condition; helpers are in good condition, males with helping opportunities who did not help are in poor condition, and nonhelpers without helping opportunities comprise a mixture of birds in good and poor condition. This conclusion was supported by differences in the timing of breeding (a proxy for condition) between groups: helpers bred earliest and nonhelpers with helping opportunities bred latest. Furthermore, we found no evidence that helpers gained any future reproductive benefits. We suggest that condition rather than benefits accrued as a direct result of helping influenced helper survival. Copyright 2010, Oxford University Press.

Date: 2010
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arq137 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:beheco:v:21:y:2010:i:6:p:1186-1194

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://academic.oup.com/journals

Access Statistics for this article

Behavioral Ecology is currently edited by Louise Barrett

More articles in Behavioral Ecology from International Society for Behavioral Ecology Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().