Mass‐ and Density‐Dependent Reproductive Success and Reproductive Costs in a Capital Breeder

Festa‐Bianchet, Marco; Gaillard, Jean‐Michel; Jorgenson, Jon T.

doi:10.1086/286175

Cited by 338 publications

(283 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

254

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…By contrast, high-quality mothers may experience no trade-off between maintaining their own condition and allocation to their offspring. Festa-Bianchet et al (1998) showed a higher cost of reproduction for lighter ewes at high population density. These results could also be explained by competition mechanisms.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Individual differences, density dependence and offspring birth traits in a population of red deer

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Variation between individuals is an essential component of natural selection and evolutionary change, but it is only recently that the consequences of persistent differences between individuals on population dynamics have been considered. In particular, few authors have addressed whether interactions exist between individual quality and environmental variation. In part, this is due to the difficulties of collecting sufficient data, but also the challenge of defining individual quality. Using a long-established study population of red deer, Cervus elaphus, inhabiting the North Block of the Isle of Rum, and three quality measures, this paper investigates how differences in maternal quality affect variation in birth body mass and date, as population density varies, and how this differs depending on the sex of the offspring and the maternal quality measure used. Significant interactions between maternal quality, measured as a hind's total contribution to population growth, and population density are reported for birth mass, but only for male calves. Analyses using dominance or age at primiparity to define maternal quality showed no significant interactions with population density, highlighting the difficulties of defining a consistent measure of individual quality.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Individual differences, density dependence and offspring birth traits in a population of red deer

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Gamma-type models (where variance increases as a function of the mean 2 ), but with an identity link function, were used for these populations. Additionally, density at Ram Mountain ( Festa-Bianchet et al 1998) and predator presence in both the bighorn sheep populations ( Festa-Bianchet et al 2006) were controlled for. Significant outliers (identified using 'cook's distance'; Fox 2002, p. 206) were removed to achieve diagnostic plots that did not reveal systematic bias (see the electronic supplementary material 1).…”

Section: (A) Study Populationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eco-evolutionary dynamics: disentangling phenotypic, environmental and population fluctuations

Ezard

Côté

Pelletier

2009

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Decomposing variation in population growth into contributions from both ecological and evolutionary processes is of fundamental concern, particularly in a world characterized by rapid responses to anthropogenic threats. Although the impact of ecological change on evolutionary response has long been acknowledged, the converse has predominantly been neglected, especially empirically. By applying a recently published conceptual framework, we assess and contrast the relative importance of phenotypic and environmental variability on annual population growth in five ungulate populations. In four of the five populations, the contribution of phenotypic variability was greater than the contribution of environmental variability, although not significantly so. The similarity in the contributions of environment and phenotype suggests that neither is worthy of neglect. Population growth is a consequence of multiple processes, which strengthens arguments advocating integrated approaches to assess how populations respond to their environments.

show abstract

“…This trade-oV between current reproduction and future survival is commonly referred to as the cost of reproduction (sensu Williams 1966), and this has been documented in a wide range of taxa: mammals (Clutton-Brock et al 1989;Festa-Bianchet et al 1998;Gittleman and Thompson 1988;Lambin and Yoccoz 2001;Sand 1996;Tavecchia et al 2005) including humans Homo sapiens and other primates (Anderson 1983;Bronson 1995;Dufour and Sauther 2002;Ellison 2003;Lummaa and Clutton-Brock 2002), birds (Lindén and Møller 1989;Monaghan and Nager 1997;Moreno 1989;Zammuto 1986) and plants (Obeso 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Observational evidence of risk-sensitive reproductive allocation in a long-lived mammal

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Organisms should adopt a risk-sensitive reproductive allocation when summer reproductive allocation competes with survival in the coming winter. This trade off is shown through autumn female body mass, which acts as an insurance against unpredictable winter environmental conditions. We tested this hypothesis on female reindeer in a population that has experienced a time period of dramatic increase in abundance. Environmental conditions during winter were fairly stable (with the exception of 1 year). We conclude that increased population abundance (perhaps in interaction with winter environmental conditions) could have represented a worsening of winter environmental conditions as both autumn offspring and spring female body mass decreased during the course of the study. Moreover, we found that the cost of reproduction was related to environmental conditions as: (1) autumn body mass was larger for barren than for lactating females, and this difference was temporally highly variable; (2) lactating females produced smaller offspring than barren ones in the following year; and (3) reproductive output (offspring size) decreased over time. We also found evidence of quality effects as lactating females had a higher reproductive success in the following year. In sum, a worsening of winter conditions lead to: (1) decreased reproductive output; (2) lowered autumn body mass for lactating females; and (3) increased body mass for barren females. Since females reduce their reproductive allocation as winter conditions becomes more severe, we conclude that reindeer have adopted a risk-sensitive reproductive allocation.

show abstract

Mass‐ and Density‐Dependent Reproductive Success and Reproductive Costs in a Capital Breeder

Cited by 338 publications

References 5 publications

Individual differences, density dependence and offspring birth traits in a population of red deer

Individual differences, density dependence and offspring birth traits in a population of red deer

Eco-evolutionary dynamics: disentangling phenotypic, environmental and population fluctuations

Observational evidence of risk-sensitive reproductive allocation in a long-lived mammal

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About