Load control speed screw conveyer

<p>The flight paths of two blue bottle flies (<i>Calliphora vomitoria</i>) sampled from high-speed video (<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0151099#pone.0151099.s002" target="_blank">S1 Movie</a>): A) at the rate of the visual system of a human (40 frames/s) and B) at the rate of a pied flycatcher (120 frames/s) at a light intensity of approximately 500 cdm^-2. The flycatcher refreshes visual input almost three times faster, resulting in a much more detailed view of the flight paths of the flies.</p

incperiod_data

phenotypic dat

pedigree_females

pedigree file. Note that all ringnr are dummycoded and do not reflect the original individual identifiers. This is also the case for the phenotype data

Collared flycatcher females included in the study and their prevalence to Haemosporidia parasites.

<p>Collared flycatcher females included in the study and their prevalence to Haemosporidia parasites.</p

Mixed Model (Residual lay date) and Generalized Linear Mixed Model estimates with 95% confidence intervals (breeding year and bird identity as random factors).

<p>Infected and uninfected females do not differ in reproductive output (model estimates are not different from 0). Infected females served as a reference group.</p

Comparison of the seasonal pattern of reproductive performance between female collared flycatchers infected with blood parasites (solid black line), uninfected females (solid grey line) and the mean for all analyzed females (dashed black line) breeding on the Swedish island of Öland.

<p>It was plotted with model-averaged (ΔAICc<2) prediction lines using shrinkage estimates: a) number of fledglings, b) number of recruits, c) number of recruits per fledged offspring. Uninfected females show a typical seasonal decline in reproductive success where they rear more fledglings and recruits early in the season, whereas females infected with Haemosporidia parasites show an opposite pattern. As a result, uninfected females rear proportionally more recruits per fledgling early in the season. Infected females, however, experience a much shallower decline in recruits as the breeding season progresses, and thus recruit the same number of offspring. Despite altered pattern among infected females, the trend for the population remains negative.</p

Comparison of fledgling weight of Haemosporidia-infected and uninfected collared flycatcher females.

<p>Fledglings of infected females are on average heavier than offspring of uninfected females. The plot dots show means for respective groups of females, error bars indicate 1 standard error from the mean.</p

Summary of GLMM reproductive success models for collared flycatcher females.

<p>Averaged parameter estimates and importance weights were derived from the models for which ΔAIC_c<2. Bold font points at variables for which model estimates are different from 0.</p

Summary of GLMM reproductive success models for collared flycatcher females either infected with hPHSIB1 lineage or uninfected.

<p>Averaged parameter estimates and importance weights were derived from the models for which ΔAIC_c<2. Bold font points at variables for which model estimates are different from 0.</p

Published estimates of additive genetic variance in estimates of lifetime fitness in wild populations.

<p>Lifetime fitness was estimated as the sum of offspring recruited into the breeding population (Lifetime Reproductive Success). The method of calculating the variance was based either on parent-offspring regression (PO) or on an animal model (AM). Sample sizes are denoted by <i>n</i>. For each organism and each sex, we report the mean, the additive genetic variance components with (between brackets) the standard error and its significance (non significant (n.s.) or P<0.01 (**)) and the sex-specific coefficient of additive genetic variation in LRS ( = √(V_A)/mean).</p>†<p>Variance component and its standard error not reported by authors; variance component calculated as product of heritability and phenotypic variance.</p