Data from: Direct fitness benefits explain mate preference, but not choice, for similarity in heterozygosity levels, Ecology Letters

Data from: <b><i>Direct fitness benefits explain mate preference, but not choice, for similarity in heterozygosity levels - </i></b><i>Lies Zandberg, Gerrit Gort, Kees van Oers, Camilla A. Hinde</i><p><i></i></p><div><i>Ecology Letters</i></div

DAY 7. Linear Mixed-effects Model showing no effect of egg speckling on chick mass on day 7.

<p>Original nest nested within foster nest was included as a random factor (estimate 0.27, +/-SE 0.08). N = 266 chicks and 47 nests.</p

General Linear Model showing the amount of prey delivered by males was not related to the speckling on the eggs his partner laid or the eggs that he saw during incubation (N = 29 nests).

<p>General Linear Model showing the amount of prey delivered by males was not related to the speckling on the eggs his partner laid or the eggs that he saw during incubation (N = 29 nests).</p

General Linear Model showing that heavier females laid less speckled eggs (N = 25 nests).

<p>General Linear Model showing that heavier females laid less speckled eggs (N = 25 nests).</p

Great tit eggs were photographed in the wild using a UV-sensitive camera, producing images in the (A) human-visible spectrum and (B) ultraviolet spectrum.

<p>Images were converted to correspond to a blue tit’s (<i>Cyanistes caeruleus</i>) double cones <b>(C)</b>. Egg patterns were measured using a digital image analysis technique <b>(D)</b> based on the fast Fourier transform, in which information about egg speckling is captured at different spatial frequencies. The original image is broken down into seven new images, each containing information at a different spatial scale. Low spatial frequencies <b>(E)</b> capture information about the relative contribution of large markings and high spatial frequencies <b>(F)</b> capture information about the relative contribution of small markings (see Stoddard and Stevens 2010 for details). Egg photograph by M. C. Stoddard.</p

The amount of prey delivered by males was not related to egg speckling on the eggs (A) that his partner laid or (B) that he saw (his partner incubated).

<p>N = 29 nests. Brood size is controlled for by using the residuals of prey delivered by males over brood size on the y-axis.</p

DAY 3. Linear Mixed-effects Model showing no effect of egg speckling on chick mass on day 3.

<p>Original nest nested within foster nest was included as a random factor (estimate 0.28, +/-SE 0.09). N = 287 chicks and 47 nests.</p

Female lay date had no effect on egg speckling (PC1).

<p>N = 47 (see text for statistics). Lay date is the date a female laid her first egg, shown here as the number of days after 31 March 2009.</p

DAY 15. Linear Mixed-effects Model showing no effect of egg speckling on chick mass on day 15.

<p>Original nest nested within foster nest was included as a random factor (estimate 0.30, +/−SE 0.08). N = 236 chicks and 47 nests.</p