City blackbirds live longer but are less healthy than their country counterparts, a study has found.
For the blackbird, the benefits of urban living include better access to food and less chance of being killed by a predator, scientists believe.
The downside is that city birds age faster and are generally less fit.
What accounts for the trend is unknown, but may involve exposure to city pollution early in life.
Professor Simon Verhulst, a member of the research team from the University of Groningen in the Netherlands, said: "This could be present at birth or develop in the first year, as cities are an unhealthy environment."
To study the health effects of city life on blackbirds, the scientists used a well known genetic ageing marker.
Telomeres, DNA structures that form a protective cap on the ends of chromosomes, shorten with increasing age but at a faster rate in stressed or sick individuals.
The team found that year-old city blackbirds had significantly shorter telomeres than rural yearlings living about 18 miles away.
In older birds, the difference was even greater.
Blood samples were taken from blackbirds in five cities, Granada, Seville and Madrid in Spain, Dijon in France, and Turku in Finland.
The signs of premature ageing revealed by shorter telomeres also indicated that city birds were less healthy than those from woodland populations, said the scientists.
Yet the proportion of older birds caught by the researchers in mist nets was higher in the cities.
Co-author Dr Juan Ibanez-Alamo, also from the University of Groningen, said: "This means that mortality is lower in the cities, so the advantages of city life compensate for the negative health effects."
The findings appear in the Royal Society journal Biology Letters.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here