Dynamic signalling using cosmetics may explain the reversed sexual dichromatism in the monogamous greater flamingo

  • Juan A. AmatEmail author
  • Araceli Garrido
  • Francesca Portavia
  • Manuel Rendón-Martos
  • Antonio Pérez-Gálvez
  • Juan Garrido-Fernández
  • Jesús Gómez
  • Arnaud Béchet
  • Miguel A. Rendón
Original Article


Colourful plumage is typical of males in species with conventional sex roles, in which females care for offspring and males compete for females, as well as in many monogamous species in which both sexes care for offspring. Reversed sexual dichromatism—more colourful females than males—is predominant in species with sex role reversal. In the latter species, males care for offspring and females compete for mates, the mating system is mainly polyandrous and there is reversed size dimorphism—females are larger than males. Here, we document a case of reversed dichromatism, in the greater flamingo Phoenicopterus roseus, in which there is no sex role reversal and no reversed size dimorphism. Although theoretical models postulate that cases of reversed dichromatism should be rare among monogamous ornamented birds, our findings show that the use of cosmetics might be a mechanism for the occurrence of more ornamented females than males. Indeed, the concentrations of carotenoids in the uropygial secretions used as make-up were higher in females than in males. Apparently, there was a trade-off between coloration and antioxidant defence, as the concentrations of carotenoids in the uropygial secretions were lower during chick provisioning than in other periods, contrary to those in plasma. In this system, the application of make-up would act as a dynamic signal, which would allow a rapid reallocation of resources used for signalling among functions depending on needs. Cases like this may have evolved to signal the ability to provide parental care when females are more physiologically stressed than males.

Significance statement

For species in which there is no sex role reversal, but females are ornamented and the resources allocated to ornaments are important for offspring viability, it has even been suggested that females should be less ornamented than males. This may be because for females, it would be better to invest directly in fecundity rather than in costly ornaments. We show a case of reversed sexual dichromatism in a monogamous bird with no sex role reversal, the greater flamingo, where females apply make-up over feathers. In the case of this species, there could be directional male mate preferences for female plumage coloration because the costs of signalling would not affect breeding investment in females, since cosmetic coloration is not used after it is no longer required, thus allowing the resources used in make-up (carotenoids) to be used in other functions.


Carotenoids Make-up Plumage coloration Plumage maintenance Sexual differences Uropygial secretions 



We thank “Cañada de los Pájaros” for providing facilities. M. I. Adrián, O. González, P. Rodríguez, and M. Vázquez helped to capture flamingos and taking samples. Mónica Gutiérrez, from LEM-EBD, did the molecular sexing. Two anonymous reviewers and the editors commented on an earlier version.


Funds were received from Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia of Spain with EU-EURF support (research grants BOS2002-04695 and CGL2005-01136/BOS).

Compliance with ethical standards

Ethical approval

International, national, and institutional guidelines for the use and capture of animals were followed. Consejería de Medio Ambiente from the Junta de Andalucía (Regional Government) gave permission to conduct the study. An approval from an ethics committee was not needed.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

265_2018_2551_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (5.2 mb)
ESM 1 (PDF 5353 kb)


  1. Agresti A (2002) Categorical data analysis, 2nd edn. Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amat JA, Rendón MA (2017) Flamingo coloration and its significance. In: Anderson M (ed) Flamingos: behavior, biology, and relationship with man. Nova Scientific Publishers, New York, pp 77–95Google Scholar
  3. Amat JA, Rendón MA, Rendón-Martos M, Garrido A, Ramírez JM (2005) Ranging behaviour of greater flamingos during the breeding and post-breeding periods: linking connectivity to biological processes. Biol Conserv 125:183–192. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Amat JA, Rendón MA, Garrido-Fernández J, Garrido A, Rendón-Martos M, Pérez-Gálvez A (2011) Greater flamingos Phoenicopterus roseus use uropygial secretions as make-up. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 65:665–673. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Amundsen T, Pärn H (2006) Female coloration: review of functional and non-functional hypotheses. In: Hill GE, McGraw KJ (eds) Bird coloration. Volume II. Function and evolution. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MS, pp 280–345Google Scholar
  6. Andersson M (1994) Sexual selection. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  7. Botero CA, Rubenstein DR (2012) Fluctuating environments, sexual selection and the evolution of flexible mate choice in birds. PLoS One 7:e32311. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Bowler JM (1994) The condition of Bewick’s swans Cygnus columbianus bewickii in winter as assessed by their abdominal profiles. Ardea 82:241–248Google Scholar
  9. Broughton DR, Schneider BC, McGraw KJ, Ardia DR (2017) Carotenoids buffer the acute phase response on fever, sickness behavior, and rapid bill color change in zebra finches. J Exp Biol (published online,
  10. Bulluck LP, Foster MJ, Kay S, Cox DE, Viverette C, Huber S (2017) Feather carotenoid content is correlated with reproductive success and provisioning rate in prothonotary warblers. Auk 134:229–239. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Butler MW, Toomey MB, McGraw KJ (2011) How many color metrics do we need? Evaluating how different color-scoring procedures explain carotenoid pigment content in avian bare-part and plumage ornaments. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 65:401–413. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cézilly F (1993) Nest desertion in the greater flamingo, Phoenicopterus ruber roseus. Anim Behav 45:1038–1040. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chenoweth SF, Doughty P, Kokko H (2006) Can non-directional male mating preferences facilitate honest female ornamentation? Ecol Lett 9:179–184. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Clutton-Brock T (2007) Sexual selection in males and females. Science 318:1882–1885. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Clutton-Brock T (2009) Sexual selection in females. Anim Behav 77:3–11. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Core Team R (2013) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna Google Scholar
  17. Darwin C (1871) The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. John Murray, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Delhey K, Peters A, Johnsen A, Kempenaers B (2006) Seasonal changes in blue tit crown color: do they signal individual quality? Behav Ecol 17:790–798. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Delhey K, Peters A, Kempenaers B (2007) Cosmetic coloration in birds: occurrence, function, and evolution. Am Nat 169:S145–S158. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Dell Inc (2015) STATISTICA (data analysis software system), version 12,
  21. Endler JA (1980) Natural selection on color patterns in Poecilia reticulata. Evolution 34:76–91. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Endler JA, Mielke P (2005) Comparing entire colour patterns as birds see them. Biol J Linn Soc 86:405–431. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Faivre B, Grégoire A, Préault M, Cézilly F, Sorci G (2003) Immune activation rapidly mirrored in a secondary sexual trait. Science 300:103. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Freeman HD, Valuska AJ, Taylor RR, Ferrie GM, Grand AP, Leighty KA (2016) Plumage variation and social partner choice in the greater flamingo (Phoenicopterus roseus). Zoo Biol 35:409–414. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Gladbach A, Gladbach DJ, Kempenaers B, Quillfeldt P (2010) Female-specific colouration, carotenoids and reproductive investment in a dichromatic species, the upland goose Chloephaga picta leucoptera. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 64:1779–1789. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Griffiths R, Double MC, Orr K, Dawson RJG (1998) A DNA test to sex most birds. Mol Ecol 7:1071–1075. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Heinsohn R, Legge S, Endler JA (2005) Extreme reversed sexual dichromatism in a bird without sex role reversal. Science 309:617–619. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Henschen AE, Whittingham LA, Dunn PA (2016) Oxidative stress is related to both melanin- and carotenoid-based ornaments in the common yellowthroat. Funct Ecol 30:749–758. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hill GE (2002) A red bird in a brown bag: the function and evolution of ornamental plumage coloration in the house finch. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hill GE (2014) Stress, condition, and ornamentation. Integr Comp Biol 54:533–538. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Hodos W (1993) The visual capabilities of birds. In: Zeigler PH, Bischof H-J (eds) Vision, brain and behavior in birds. MIT Press, Cambridge, MS, pp 63–76Google Scholar
  32. Hutton P, Seymoure BM, McGraw KJ, Ligon RA, Simpson RK (2015) Dynamic color communication. Curr Opin Behav Sci 6:41–49. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Isaksson C, Andersson S (2008) Oxidative stress does not influence carotenoid mobilization and plumage pigmentation. Proc R Soc Lond B 275:309–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jenni-Eiermann S, Jenni L, Smith S, Constantini D (2014) Oxidative stress in endurance flight: an unconsidered factor in bird migration. PLoS One 9:e95650. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Johnson A, Cézilly F (2007) The greater flamingo. Poyser, LondonGoogle Scholar
  36. Johnson IP, Sibly RM (1993) Pre-breeding behaviour affects condition, assessed by abdominal profile, and hence breeding success of Canada geese Branta canadensis. Wildfowl 44:60–68Google Scholar
  37. Kraaijeveld K (2003) Degree of mutual ornamentation in birds is related to divorce rate. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:1785–1791. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kraaijeveld K, Kraaijeveld-Smit FLJ, Komdeur J (2007) The evolution of mutual ornamentation. Anim Behav 74:657–677. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Maia R, White TE (2018) Comparing colors using visual models. Behav Ecol 29:649–659. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Maia R, Eliason CM, Bitton P-P, Doucet SM, Shawkey MD (2013) Pavo: an R package for the analysis, visualization and organization of spectral data. Methods Ecol Evol 4:609–613. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Mair P, Schoenbrodt F, Wilcox R (2017) WRS2: Wilcox robust estimation and testing. R package v 0.9–2,
  42. Maynard Smith J, Harper D (2003) Animal signals. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  43. McGraw KJ (2006) Mechanisms of carotenoid-based coloration. In: McGraw KJ (ed) Hill GE. Bird coloration.Volume I. Mechanisms and measurements. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MS, pp 177–242Google Scholar
  44. Montgomerie R (2006) Cosmetic and adventitious colors. In: McGraw KJ (ed) Hill GE. Bird coloration.Volume I. Mechanisms and measurements. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MS, pp 399–427Google Scholar
  45. Negro JJ, Tella JL, Blanco G, Forero MG, Garrido-Fernández J (2000) Diet explains interpopulation variation of plasma carotenoids and skin pigmentation in nestling white storks. Physiol Biochem Zool 73:97–101. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Nordeide JT, Kekäläinen J, Janhunen M, Kortet R (2013) Females ornaments revisted—are they correlated with offspring quality? J Anim Ecol 82:26–38. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Ödeen A, Håstad O (2003) Complex distribution of avian color vision systems revealed by sequencing the SWS1 opsin from total DNA. Mol Biol Evol 20:855–862. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Osorio D, Vorobyev M (1996) Colour vision as an adaptation to frugivory in primates. Proc R Soc Lond B 263:593–599. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pérez-Rodríguez L, Viñuela J (2008) Carotenoid-based bill and eye ring coloration as honest signals of condition: an experimental test in the red-legged partridge (Alectoris rufa). Naturwissenschaften 95:821–830. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Perrot C, Béchet A, Hanzen C, Arnaud A, Pradel R, Cézilly F (2016) Sexual-display complexity varies non-linearly with age and predicts breeding status in greater flamingos. Sci Rep 6:36242. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. Powell DM (1997) Display behaviour and breeding biology of Caribbean flamingos (Phoenicopterus ruber ruber). Anim Keepers Forum 24:395–405Google Scholar
  52. Rendón MA, Garrido A, Ramírez JM, Rendón-Martos M, Amat JA (2001) Despotic establishment of breeding colonies of greater flamingos, Phoenicopterus ruber, in southern Spain. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 50:55–60. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rendón MA, Garrido A, Amat JA, Rendón-Martos M (2009) Monitoring of greater flamingo colonies: some proposals for measuring and interpreting results. Flamingo 1:62–75Google Scholar
  54. Rendón MA, Garrido A, Guerrero JC, Rendón-Martos M, Amat JA (2012) Crop size as an index of chick provisioning in the greater flamingo Phoenicopterus roseus. Ibis 154:379–388. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rendón MA, Garrido A, Rendón-Martos M, Ramírez JM, Amat JA (2014) Assessing sex-related chick provisioning in greater flamingo Phoenicopterus roseus parents using capture-recapture models. J Anim Ecol 83:479–490. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Rosenthal MF, Murphy TG, Darling N, Tarvin KA (2012) Ornamental bill color rapidly signals changing condition. J Avian Biol 43:553–564. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Searcy WA, Nowicki S (2005) The evolution of animal communication: reliability and deception in signaling systems. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  58. Shuster SM, Wade MJ (2003) Mating systems and strategies. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  59. Simons MJP, Cohen AA, Verhulst S (2012) What does carotenoid-dependent coloration tell? Plasma carotenoid level signals immunocompetence and oxidative stress state in birds—a meta-analysis. PLoS One 7:e43088. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  60. Studer-Thiersch A (1986) Tarsus length as an indication of sex in the flamingo genus Phoenicopterus. Int Zoo Yearb 24(25):240–243. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Svensson PA, Forsgren E, Amundsen T, Nilsson Sköld H (2005) Chromatic interaction between egg pigmentation and skin chromatophores in the nuptial coloration of females two-spotted gobies. J Exp Biol 208:4391–4397. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Tavecchia G, Pradel R, Boy V, Johnson AR, Cézilly F (2001) Sex- and age-related variation in survival and cost of first reproduction in greater flamingos. Ecology 82:165–174.[0165:SAARVI]2.0.CO;2Google Scholar
  63. Tobias JA, Montgomerie R, Lyon B (2012) The evolution of female ornaments and weaponry: social selection, sexual selection and ecological competition. Phil Trans R Soc B 367:2274–2293. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Torres R, Velando A (2003) A dynamic trait affects continuous pair assessment in the blue-footed booby, Sula nebouxii. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 55:65–72. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Venables WN, Ripley BD (2002) Modern applied statistics with S. Springer-Verlag New York Inc., New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Vorobyev M, Osorio D (1998) Receptor noise as a determinant of colour thresholds. Proc R Soc Lond B 265:351–358. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Vorobyev M, Osorio D, Bennett ATD, Marshall N, Cuthill I (1998) Tetrachromacy, oil droplets and bird plumage colours. J Comp Physiol A 183:621–633. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Woodall AA, Lee SW-M, Weesie RJ, Jackson MJ, Britton G (1997) Oxidation of carotenoids by free radicals: relationship between structure and reactivity. Biochim Biophys Acta 1336:33–42. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Ye X, Al-Babili S, Klöti A, Zhang J, Lucca P, Beyer P, Potrykus I (2000) Engineering the provitamin A (β-carotene) biosynthetic pathway into (carotenoid-free) rice endosperm. Science 287:303–305. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Zillich U, Black J (2002) Body mass and abdominal profile index of captive Hawaiian geese. Wildfowl 53:67–77Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Juan A. Amat
    • 1
    Email author
  • Araceli Garrido
    • 2
  • Francesca Portavia
    • 1
    • 3
  • Manuel Rendón-Martos
    • 4
  • Antonio Pérez-Gálvez
    • 5
  • Juan Garrido-Fernández
    • 5
  • Jesús Gómez
    • 1
  • Arnaud Béchet
    • 6
  • Miguel A. Rendón
    • 1
  1. 1.Estación Biológica de Doñana (EBD-CSIC)SevillaSpain
  2. 2.Agencia de Medio Ambiente y Agua de Andalucía, Consejería de Medio Ambiente y Ordenación del TerritorioMálagaSpain
  3. 3.Pesaro and UrbinoItaly
  4. 4.Reserva Natural Laguna de Fuente de Piedra, Consejería de Medio Ambiente y Ordenación del TerritorioFuente de PiedraSpain
  5. 5.Instituto de la Grasa (IG-CSIC)SevillaSpain
  6. 6.Institut de Recherche de la Tour du ValatArlesFrance

Personalised recommendations