curr-biol_si

Sato NJ, Tanaka KD, Okahisa Y, Yamamichi M, Kuehn R, Gula R, Ueda K, Theuerkauf J

Supplemental InformationNestling polymorphism in a cuckoo-host system

Supplemental Experimental Procedures

Materials and Methods

Study Sites, Species and Measurements

We conducted field investigations at three sites on the main island (Grande Terre) of New Caledonia during three breeding seasons (September-January) from 2011 to 2014: Parc provincial des Grandes Fougères (main study site) and near surroundings (21°37’39.44” S, 165°45’41.75” E), approx. 40 km west (21°35’58.89” S, 165°23’55.61” E) of the main study site, and approx. 130 km northwest (20°41’45.55” S, 164°59’38.41” E) of the main study site.

The fan-tailed gerygone Gerygone flavolateralis flavolateralis is a passerine bird of the family Acanthizidae and an endemic subspecies to New Caledonia. The shining bronze-cuckoo Chalcites lucidus layardi is a brood parasitic cuckoo of the family Cuculidae, and also an endemic subspecies to New Caledonia. Both are abundant and widespread throughout Grande Terre year-round, and the gerygone is exclusively parasitised by the bronze-cuckoo [S1].

To measure reflectance, we captured 32 gerygone chicks from 18 broods (dark: N = 5; bright: N = 11; polymorphic: N = 2), out of which 22 were of the bright morph and 10 were of the dark morph. We also captured 3 shining bronze-cuckoo chicks to measure reflectance, which all were of the bright morph. We measured reflectance spectra of light from 300 nm to 700 nm wavelengths from their skin (Figure S1a) using spectrophotometers (USB-2000 and Jaz-EL-200, Ocean Optics, Dunedin, Florida, USA) with light irradiated by a deuterium-tungsten-halogen light source (DT-MINI-2-GS, Ocean Optics, Dunedin, Florida, USA). Before measurements, we calibrated the spectrometer with a diffuse reflectance standard (WS-1, Ocean Optics, Dunedin, Florida, USA). Measurements were carried out in a film-changing bag (E-7041, Etsumi, Tokyo, Japan) to block ambient light. while holding chicks by hand, we placed the probe vertically above their skin, keeping an approximately 2-mm distance ensured by insulating tape winded around the probe. To avoid injuring gerygone chicks, we conducted measurements when they were at least 3 days old, while cuckoo chicks were measured on the day of hatching before host parents ejected them. We measured reflectance spectra of bare skin on the back of each chick twice (except for 4 chicks that we could only measure once). This usually took only few minutes, thereby avoiding potential negative effects on chicks. From the 35 chicks, we obtained 66 reflectance spectra in total (dark: n = 18; bright: n = 42; cuckoo: n = 6).

Because host parents were likely to eject cuckoo chicks, we artificially incubated 2 cuckoo eggs to measure reflectance spectra of hatchlings (Mini Advance Incubator, Brinsea, Wiscombe, North Somerset, UK). We conducted measurement for one cuckoo chick that hatched naturally in the host nest before being ejected by the host. All artificially hatched cuckoo chicks were reintroduced in the nearest active nest on the day of hatching in the case that the original nest was depredated. We placed an artificial cuckoo egg in the nest at least 24 h before we replaced it with a cuckoo chick.

Skin Colour Polymorphism in Chicks

There was neither a sign of colour polymorphism in adults nor a sign of assortative mating in relation to the chick skin colour polymorphism in the gerygone since there were no detectable differences in adult songs and plumages between parents of dark and bright chicks (authors’ unpublished data), which are known as indices of prezygotic isolation in birds [S2, S3]. Both dark and bright gerygone chicks were found sympatric in all study sites.

The skin colour polymorphism of host chicks was most remarkable just after hatching, and weakened with chick age (authors’ unpublished data). It became almost indistinguishable in chicks of ca. 13-15 days of age. We occasionally measured reflectance from chicks older than 5 days (2 bright and 3 dark chicks in 3 nests), but not from chicks 10 days or older. The polymorphism was not related to deformation of pigmentation such as albinism [9], since no bright chick had red irises or a pinkish bill, or fibromelanosis [S4].

We have no evidence for sympatric polymorphism in the bronze-cuckoo but photo evidence of a dark morph (Figure 1C) was published 35 years ago [S5] and taken in Parc provincial de la Rivière Bleue, approx. 100 km southeast of the main study site. Chick colour polymorphism is known in the shining-bronze cuckoo, though in different subspecies, and respective cuckoo morphs mimic chicks of respective hosts in different colours [7, 9, S6].

Avian visual model

Birds are thought to have two distinct pathways to perceive a colour, i.e., chromatic (hue) and achromatic (luminance, or perceived lightness) [S7-S9]. We estimated both chromatic [S7] and achromatic [S9] discrimination thresholds of the chick skin colours, respectively, based on the Vorobyev-Osorio model [S7, S9]. Birds of the genus Gerygone have VS (violet-sensitive) vision [S10]. However, because data of the visual performance of the study species were not available, we applied hitherto available single-cone sensitivity of a VS-type bird, the wedge-tailed shearwater Puffinus pacificus [S11], the double-cone sensitivity of the blue tit Cyanistes caeruleus [S12], and the single-cone abundance in the posterior dorsal area of retina of the satin bowerbird Ptilonorhynchus violaceus [S13], all phylogenetically closest to the gerygone among species with available information.

We first calculated photon capture Qi with sensitivity of respective photoreceptors Ci (λ) and measured reflectance spectra R (λ) according to the following equation:

Figure S1. a) Mean reflectance spectra from the skin of cuckoo chicks (green) and of both morphs of gerygone chicks: bright (blue) and dark (red). Vertical widths in translucent colours represent 95% confidence intervals. b) Distribution of measured colours in the tetrachromatic colour space of VS birds (b, c). Viewing angles are altered to illustrate the aspect of avian colour space that is visible to humans (b) and that invisible to humans (c). Each apex indicates the coordinate for a colour that stimulates solely the corresponding photoreceptor. First principal coordinates calculated from distance matrices of pairwise hue jnds between all possible combinations of measured colours, in relation to second principal coordinates (d), or chick types (e). Numbers represent the eigenvalue of the first principal component, with the proportion of variances explained in parenthesis.

Supplemental Figures

.

We then calculated the colour discrimination threshold, i.e., just noticeable difference (jnd), between a given pair of colours. Jnds were obtained from the following equations:

(S1a)

for hue [S6], and

Figure S2. a) Expected brood-type frequency at Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium in relation to recessive allele frequency, with a constant brood size C within population, according to the model described in the supplementary text. y and z represent the frequencies of parental genotypes in population, heterozygotes and recessive homozygotes, respectively. Red lines indicate the frequencies of polymorphic broods (bp), and the blue line that of monomorphic broods (bm) among the potential mating combinations (note that bp = potential – bm). b) Simulated expected frequencies by the model in relation to recessive allele frequency. Line colours denote each brood type. Horizontal lines indicate the observed frequencies of phenotype, assuming the dark morph as dominant (solid) and as recessive (dashed); observed frequencies of brood types (red): polymorphic (solid), dark monomorphic (dotted), and bright monomorphic broods (dashed). c-f Positions of the observed frequencies (indicated by red arrows and percentile values) of respective categories among the distributions of simulated expected frequencies, assuming the dark morph as dominant (shaded bars) and as recessive (open bars): phenotype (c), dark monomorphic (d), bright monomorphic (e), and polymorphic broods (f). Percentile values are underlined for dominant. Vertical lines indicate the mean of simulated frequencies when assuming the dark-morph as dominant (dashed) and as recessive (solid). Bin widths of all histograms were optimised by setting the breaks argument as “Scott” for the hist function default in R [S18].

(S1b)

for luminance [S7], where ∆f denotes the log ratio of photon captures of the focal pair of measured colours by a given type of photoreceptors:

,

and ω denotes the relative abundance of each single-cone type in the posterior dorsal area of the retina, with incorporating the Weber fraction of 0.05, the conventionally adopted error rate (i.e., noise-to-signal ratio) in the Weber-Fechner law [S7]. Since fan-tailed gerygones build domed nests in which the inside is dimly lit, we considered fluctuation of the number of photons captured by cone cells (i.e., shot noise) as a relatively great quantal flux of 103 [S14]. We did not consider colour constancy because the ambient light condition should be very similar for all chick types.

Statistics

We first calculated jnds between all possible combinations of measured colours for both hue and luminance respectively based on equations S1a and S1b [S5, S7]. Next, we converted these jnds into respective distance matrices, from which we calculated tridimensional coordinates through a principal coordinate analysis (PCoA, or multi-dimensional scaling, MDS) [S15, S16].Each principal coordinate consists of a set of data, each of which corresponds to each photospectral measurement, and thus the total number of replicates analysed was n = 66. Each coordinate value indicates the relative position of each datum among the whole dataset, i.e., distance from the centroid, on each coordinate axis in its unit (jnd in this case) (see Figure S1d). Unlike jnd (i.e., psychophysical distance), all coordinate values are geometrically independent of each other, and thus the dataset is compatible with linear models [S15, S16]. Eigenvalues were used to assess the accuracy of primary eigenvectors (i.e., first principal coordinates). The rationale underlying this procedure is illustrated in [S15] and [S16].

We analysed the first principal coordinates for hue and luminance with linear mixed models (LMMs), in which brood ID and nestling ID nested within brood were assigned as random effects to avoid pseudoreplication [S15]. We assigned dummy variables [S16, S17] to each chick type, i.e., dark chick, bright chick and cuckoo chick, and set bright chick as the intercept in the LMMs. Representative values for respective chick types were calculated as the absolute value of the difference of partial coefficient from the intercept, i.e., |cuckoo chick – bright chick| and |dark chick – bright chick|. These values represent the perceivable difference of respective chick types from bright chick on average, and thus can be interpreted as chromatic (hue) or achromatic (luminance) discriminability [S15, S16]. We assumed jnd > 3 as discriminable by convention [S9]. Goodness of fit was tested by the likelihood ratio (χ2) test.

For the analyses of the observed data, we conducted a contingency (χ2) test, a binomial test, and a generalised linear model (GLM) with a likelihood-ratio (χ2) test. All statistical procedures were conducted in R [S18]. PCoAs/MDSs were conducted with the cmdscale function, setting the dimensional parameter k as 3 because jnds existed in a tridimensional colour space. LMMs were conducted with the lmer function in the lme4 package [S19] and the GLM the glm.nb function in the MASS package [S20]. Likelihood ratio tests were conducted with the Anova function in the car package [S21]. Figure S1a was drawn with the aggplot function in the pavo package [S22].

Population Genetics Model

We assumed 1-locus-2-allele complete dominance as the inheritance mechanism, which was most probable in this case because the colour difference appeared to be discrete, as we have not observed hatchlings of an ambiguous type. The observed frequency of within-nest polymorphism might be biased or obscured in several ways: an inevitable bias caused by small brood sizes, i.e., no polymorphism in single-chick broods irrespective of parental genotypes; an observational bias, i.e., before we found a nest, polymorphism in there might have already vanished due to randomly caused partial brood mortality (including that caused by brood parasitism); and a small sample size. To deal with such bias and uncertainty, we simulated stochastic distributions for expected frequencies of phenotype, monomorphic brood of each morph, and polymorphic brood at Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. These values represent the frequency of phenotype and respective brood-types, ideally obtainable in a limited number of observations and at a low average brood size of the population when the population is at the equilibrium. We assumed genetic monogamy of parents (i.e., chicks in a nest have the same genetic parents) and our observation to be random sampling for simplicity.

On allele frequencies at even intervals, offspring phenotypes were randomly sampled assuming a binomial distribution with coefficients for the emergence probabilities of respective brood types based on equations described below. parameter values were set at 33 for sample size assuming a Poisson distribution, and set for brood size ranging from 1.525 to 3.350 in integer assuming a uniform distribution (average 1.93), in reference to our observation (see Results). We iterated the sampling 500 times in R [S18].

We extracted a pair of simulated samples of phenotype frequency, each assuming the dark morph as either recessive or dominant, from samples in each iteration, among those which were nearest to the observed phenotype frequency of chicks. The brood-type frequencies and allele frequencies corresponding to the extracted phenotype frequencies were also extracted. We compared the position (i.e., percentile) of the observed frequencies of phenotype and respective brood-types within the corresponding simulated distributions of expected frequencies between recessive and dominant (see Figure S2). These simulated percentiles were resampled with the parametric bootstrapping method (iteration = 1000). The minimum requirement for Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium here is that all the observed frequencies are simultaneously contained within the corresponding simulated distributions respectively.

Equations for Population Genetics Model

When the genotype frequency in the parental generation is x for dominant homozygotes (AA), y for heterozygotes (Aa), and z for recessive homozygotes (aa), the expected genotype frequency in the offspring generation under Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium is

X =

, Y =

, and Z =

, where X denotes dominant homozygotes, Y heterozygotes, and Z recessive homozygotes; note that x + y + z = X + Y + Z = 1. The emergence of polymorphic broods is potentially limited in those from parents of the Aa-Aa pair (both heterozygotes; y2) and the Aa-aa pair (heterozygote and recessive homozygote; 2yz). However, the emergence of polymorphic broods is also limited in situations that brood size, C, is two or greater, and thus, the emergence probability of each brood type is:

bD: x2 + 2xy + 2xz (S2a)

bp:

(S2b)

bm:

(S2c)

bR: z2 (S2d)

where bD denotes dominant monomorphic broods, bp polymorphic broods, bm monomorphic broods of either from the potential mating combinations, and bR recessive monomorphic broods (Figure S2a). bp and bm are complementary to each other and thus sum up to y2 + 2yz (“potential” in Figure S2a); when C is 1, bp is always 0 and bm is always y2 + 2yz (Figure S2a).

Ethical Notes

We conducted fieldwork under permissions from Province Sud and Province Nord of New Caledonia. No chick died because of our treatments. The research protocol complies with the current laws in New Caledonia, and was approved by the ethical committee of life-sciences at Rikkyo University in Tokyo, Japan, and the First Warsaw Local Ethics Committee for Animal Experimentation in Warsaw, Poland.

Results

Colour Discriminability

We described the results for achromatic discriminability in the main text. The distribution of measured colours (in hue) overlaps in the tetrachromatic colour space of VS birds irrespective of chick types (Figure S1b, c). Eigenvalues of first principal coordinates were 3.00 (100% of variance explained) for luminance and 2.47 (82% of variance explained) for hue (Figure S1d, e), and thus they well represented the distribution of measured colours.

Observed Frequencies

We found 149 gerygone nests over three breeding seasons. We found eggs in 68 nests, out of which 18 were parasitised, and 42 nests with chicks. We were not able to determine the skin colour in 9 nests because chicks were too old, and thus the skin colour was known from 33 nests, in which we included parasitised nests. Out of them, 23 broods consisted only of bright chicks and 8 broods exclusively of dark chicks, while 2 nests contained both types of chicks, one nest with 1 chick of each morph, and the other with 1 bright and 2 dark chicks. The observed brood type frequency of bright monomorphic, polymorphic, and dark monomorphic broods was 0.70:0.06:0.24 (Figure S2d-f). The number of bright chicks was 39 and that of dark chicks 16 in total. The overall phenotype frequency of bright and dark chicks was 0.71:0.29 (Figure S2c).

Out of 42 nests containing chicks, we could not reliably assess brood size in 12 nests due to brood parasitism (3), unhatched eggs (3), egg disappearance (2), partial predation (1), the location of the nest preventing close inspection (1), and clutch or brood reduction for unknown reasons (2). The clutch and brood sizes were thus known from 50 and 30 non-parasitised nests, respectively. The estimated mean clutch and brood sizes were 1.82 (log-linear coefficient: 0.60 SE = 0.11; GLM, family = negative binomial, link = log) and 1.93 (0.66 SE = 0.17) respectively, which were not statistically different (χ21 = 0.13, P = 0.72). Frequencies of each size class did not differ between egg and nestling stages as well (contingency test, χ22 = 0.75, P = 0.69; Figure 1F).

We successfully monitored the transition from egg to nestling stages in 18 out of 30 non-parasitised nests, of which brood size was consistent with clutch size in 10 nests. Among 8 nests of clutch-brood size discordance, the causes of the discordance were unknown in 2 nests but known in 6 nests as above mentioned. After excluding these 6 nests, the probability of concordance, 10 out of 12 nests, was significantly greater than chance (one-sided binomial test, P = 0.019).

Observed Frequencies among the Expected Frequencies Inferred by Simulation

Assuming the dark morph to be dominant, all observed frequencies (red arrows in Figure S2c-f) were within the range of simulated distributions for their corresponding expected frequencies (all within 40-60%ile). In contrast, assuming the dark morph to be recessive, observed frequencies for bright monomorphic and polymorphic broods greatly diverged from those expected (namely, 3.7%ile and 90.6%ile) (Figure S2c-f). This trend was consistent in the outcome of the parametric bootstrap: mean percentiles were 4.6 and 90.3 respectively for bright monomorphic and polymorphic broods if recessive, while those for bright monomorphic and polymorphic broods if dominant were 39.3 and 55.0, respectively. The mean percentiles for the rest of frequencies were all between 35%ile and 65%ile. These results suggest that the dominant dark morph is more consistent with the assumption for Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium than the recessive one. The putative dark-morph allele frequency was inferred at 0.63 (SD = 0.070) if recessive, and at 0.11 (SD = 0.035) if dominant.

Cuckoo Chick Ejection by Host Parents

From more than 2000 h of video footage, we confirmed that all 8 cuckoo hatchlings that we found in gerygone nests were ejected by host parents both from naturally parasitised nests and nests from to which we introduced artificially incubated chicks (foster nests). Five out of 8 cuckoo chicks were confirmed to be of the bright morph, 2 seemingly bright, and 1 was unidentified. Four out of 8 host broods from these nests were composed only of bright chicks, 1 brood with only dark chicks, and 3 were unidentified. Two cuckoo chicks were fostered in 2 broods of the bright morph. The causes of failure to identify the colour of chicks were ejection of cuckoo chicks by host parents, and failure of eggs to hatch or predation of the host nests.

All parasitic eggs hatched earlier than host eggs, but host parents did not always eject parasitic chicks before their own eggs hatched. Thus, cuckoo chicks coexisted with host hatchlings in 2 nests (1 naturally parasitised and 1 fostered; both bright monomorphic broods). The shining bronze-cuckoo is probably an evictor (a brood parasite whose chicks monopolise host nests by evicting host eggs and chicks from the nests soon after hatching; Figure 1C) like Chalcites cuckoos in other areas [4, 5, S1, S5]. We could however not confirm this because host parents ejected cuckoo chicks soon after hatching (44 min. after hatching at the shortest). In foster nests, ejection by host parents occurred later than in naturally parasitised nests (1 day after introduction at the longest). We confirmed that host parents reared remaining host chicks until fledging (2 nests) or until predation (3 nests), hence saving them from eviction by cuckoo chicks (c.f., [S6]).

Supplemental References

S1. Payne, R.B. (2005) The Cuckoos. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK

S2. Haavie, J., Borge, T., Bures, S., Garamszegi, L.Z., Lampe, H.M., Moreno, J., Qvarnström, A., Török, J., and Sætre, G.-P. (2004) Flycatcher song in allopatry and sympatry – convergence, divergence and reinforcement. J. Evol. Biol. 17, 227-237

S3. Sætre, G.-P., Moum, T., Bureš, S., Král, M., Adamjan, M., and Moreno, J. (1997) A sexually selected character displacement in flycatchers reinforces premating isolation. Nature 387, 589-592

S4. Shinoyama, A., Kayashima, Y., Kinoshita, K., Mizutani, M., Namikawa, T., Matsuda, Y., and Akiyama, T. (2012) Gene duplication of endothelin 3 is closely correlated with the hyperpigmentation of the internal organs (fibromelanosis) in silky chickens. Genetics 190, 627-638

S5. Hannecart, R., and Létocart, Y. (1980) Oiseaux de Nlle Calédonie et des Loyautes, Tome 1 (New Caledonian Birds, Volume 1). Les Editions Cardinalis, Nouméa, New Caledonia

S6. Langmore, N.E., Hunt, S., and Kilner, R.M. (2003) Escalation of a coevolutionary arms race through host rejection of brood parasitic young. Nature 422, 157-160

S7. Vorobyev, M., Osorio, D., Bennett, A.T.D., Marshall, N.J., and Cuthill, I.C. (1998) Tetrachromacy, oil droplets and bird plumage colours. J. Comp. Physiol. [A] 183, 621-633

S8. Osorio, D., Miklósi, A., and Gonda, Zs. (1999) Visual ecology and perception of coloration patterns by domestic chicks. Evol. Ecol. 13, 673-689

S9. Siddiqi, A., Cronin, T.W., Loew, E.R., Vorobyev, M., and Summers, K. (2004) Interspecific and intraspecific views of color signals in the strawberry poison frog Dendrobates pumilio. J. Exp. Biol. 207, 2471-2485

S10. Ödeen, A., Håstad, O., and Alström, P. (2011) Evolution of ultraviolet vision in the largest avian radiation - the passerines. BMC Evol. Biol. 11, 313

S11. Hart, N.S., and Vorobyev, M. (2005) Modelling oil droplet absorption spectra and spectral sensitivities of bird cone photoreceptors. J. Comp. Physiol. [A] 191, 381-392

S12. Hart, N.S., Partridge, J.C., Cuthill, I.C., Bennett, A.T.D. (2000) Visual pigments, oil droplets, ocular media and cone photoreceptor distribution in two species of passerine bird: the blue tit (Parus caeruleus L.) and the blackbird (Turdus merula L.). J. Comp. Physiol. [A] 186, 375-387

S13. Hart, N.S. (2001) Variations in cone photoreceptor abundance and the visual ecology of birds. J. Comp. Physiol. [A] 187, 685-698

S14. Tanaka, K. D., Morimoto, G., Stevens, M., and Ueda, K. (2011) Rethinking visual supernormal stimuli in cuckoos: visual modeling of host and parasite signals. Behav. Ecol. 22, 1012-1019

S15. Tanaka, K.D., Denda, T., Ueda, K., and Emura, N. (2015) Fruit colour conceals endocarp dimorphism from avian seed dispersers in a tropical beach plant, Scaevola taccada (Goodeniaceae), found in Okinawa. J. Trop. Ecol. 31, 335-344

S16. Tanaka, K. D. (2015) A colour to birds and to humans: why is it so different? J. Ornithol. <DOI: 10.1007/s10336-015-1234-1>

S17. Agresti, A. (2002) An Introduction to Categorical Data Analysis. Wiley Inter-Science, Hoboken, New Jersey, USA

S18. R Core Team (2014) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/

S19. Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., and Walker, S. (2014) lme4: Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.1-8 <URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/1406.5823>

S20. Venables, W.N. and Ripley, B.D. (2002) Modern Applied Statistics with S. Fourth Edition. Springer, New York.

S21. Fox, J., and Weisberg, S. (2011). An R Companion to Applied Regression, Second Edition. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. <URL: http://socserv.socsci.mcmaster.ca/jfox/Books/Companion>

S22. Maia, R., Eliason, C. M., Bitton, P.-P., Doucet, S.M., and Shawkey, M.D. (2013) pavo: an R package for the analysis, visualization and organization of spectral data. Methods Ecol. Evol. 4, 906-913

Chromatic discriminability for both dark host and (bright) cuckoo chicks was neither greater than 3 on average nor statistically different from that for bright chick (intercept: 0.033, SE = 0.60) (Figure S1d, e): dark chick, 0.18 jnd (partial coefficient = -0.15, SE = 0.92), χ21 = 0.027, P = 0.87; cuckoo chick, 1.69 jnd (partial coefficient = -1.65 SE = 1.50), χ21 = 1.21, P = 0.27. These results suggest that the colours of respective chick types are indiscernible in terms of hue.