(Downloading may take up to 30 seconds.
If the slide opens in your browser, select File -> Save As to save it.)
Click on image to view larger version.


Figure 5


Fig. 5. Relationship between body mass (g) and tarsus length (mm) in blue tit (A) and great tit (B) nestlings depending on feeding treatment. Blue tit (mean tarsus length ± s.e.m.: 19.4±0.06 mm, N=108): control group: F1,53=24.75, P<0.0001, slope estimate ± s.e.m. = 0.68±0.14 (nest: Z=1.51, P=0.06); carotenoid-fed group: F1,51=3.23, P=0.08, slope estimate ± s.e.m. = 0.27±0.15 (nest: Z=1.17, P=0.12). Great tit (mean tarsus length ± s.e.m.: 22.43±0.08 mm, N=82): control group: F1,39=28.15, P<0.0001, slope estimate ± s.e.m. = 1.26±0.24, (nest: Z=1.33, P=0.09); carotenoid-fed group: F1,39=21.94, P<0.0001, slope estimate ± s.e.m. = 0.78±0.17 (nest: Z=1.24, P=0.11).