Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Dataset . 2019
License: CC 0
Data sources: ZENODO
DRYAD
Dataset . 2019
License: CC 0
Data sources: Datacite
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Data from: Experimental old nest material predicts hoopoe (Upupa epops) eggshell and uropygial gland microbiota

Authors: Lora, Silvia Díaz; Martin-Vivaldi, Manuel; García-Pelayo, Natalia Juárez; García, Manuel Azcárate; Rodríguez-Ruano, Sonia M.; Bueno, Manuel Martínez; JoseSoler, Juan;

Data from: Experimental old nest material predicts hoopoe (Upupa epops) eggshell and uropygial gland microbiota

Abstract

Nest re-use in birds has the potential cost of infection by parasites and pathogens but may also be a source of beneficial symbiotic bacteria transmitted horizontally. Eurasian hoopoes (Upupa epops) host antibiotic-producing bacteria in their uropygial gland, but only while breeding, which suggests that the nest-hole may be a source of those symbionts. Interestingly, hoopoes do not build nest, thus might prefer for reproduction nest holes with soft materials from previous reproductions. Here, we tested experimentally this preference by installing in the field new nest boxes that were left empty or filled with either sawdust or a mixture of sawdust and hoopoe´s nest material from the previous year. We explored the experimental effect on the composition of the uropygial secretion bacterial community, on eggshell bacteria loads, and on several proxies of reproductive success. Hoopoes bred significantly more often in nest boxes with nest material than in empty ones, but the type of nest material did not affect nest box occupancy. Eggs in nest boxes with old-soft material harbored higher bacterial density on their shells, and the microbiota of the uropygial secretion of nestlings and females in these nest boxes differed from those in nest boxes without old-soft material. Moreover, although the experiment did not affect breeding success or related proxies, several Operational Taxonomic Units from female uropygial secretions were positively associated with hatching success. This is the first experimental evidence showing that re-used nest material affects the bacterial community of the uropygial secretions of hoopoe females. This suggests that the nest material can be a source of strains for their incorporation to both the uropygial gland and eggshell communities, highlighting a possible advantage of nest re-use previously unconsidered.

Data fileData collected in the field during the 2015 breeding season in the Hoya de Guadix (37 ºC 18´N, 11´W), Granada (southern Spain). The data used in the analysis of females and nestlings are shown.

Keywords

symbiotic bacteria, Nest material re-use, Uropygial gland secretion, Upupa epops, eggshell, horizontal transmission

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    1
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    OpenAIRE UsageCounts
    Usage byUsageCounts
    visibility views 3
  • 3
    views
    Powered byOpenAIRE UsageCounts
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
visibility
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
views
OpenAIRE UsageCountsViews provided by UsageCounts
1
Average
Average
Average
3