Correlation patterns in roe deer cranium: sexual dimorphism across different habitats

Abstract

Complex evolutionary interactions can cause differential responses of males and females to environmental factors which result in variations of the degree of sexual dimorphism across different habitats. Roe deer Capreolus capreolus is an excellent model species for analyzing sexual dimorphism in the context of habitat variability as the most widespread ungulate species in Europe. The impact of three different habitat types (closed, intermediate and open) on the level of cranial integration in roe deer and patterns between sexes was tested by analyzing 761 adult craniums from 11 roe deer populations in Serbia. Our results confirmed higher level of integration and more pronounced sexual dimorphism in closed habitats in comparison with open habitats. Males also showed different patterns of integration across habitats than females. The general consistency of results across different tests suggests that patterns of integration between sex and habitat groups tend to be different for males and females from different habitat types. When faced with strong selective pressures, patterns of correlations among skeletal elements can evolve even within a species as an indirect influence of social organization through habitat and sexual selection. We propose that cranial integration in roe deer evolved according to the predictions of the adaptive model of phenotypic differentiation within a taxon in closed habitats channeled by stabilizing selection. The different patterns of cranial integration between sexes after successful colonization of intermediate and open habitats can be explained by a change in overall selective pressures to disruptive/ directional selection, thus breaking up observed patterns of integration, since they are treated as a constraint in changed circumstances.

Smaller does not mean worse: variation of roe deer antlers from two distant populations in their mechanical and structural properties and mineral profile

“…Some studies have investigated the factors that determine its distribution: vegetation cover (Acevedo et al , ), food availability (Plard et al , ), climate (Cagnacci et al , ) or population density (Pettorelli et al , ). Other studies have described the patterns of age‐specific antler development (Stubbe, ) or the timing and physiology of antler cycle (Sempéré, ), some others have investigated roe deer cranial morphology and habitat use (Milošević‐Zlatanović et al , ) or biometric differences of skulls that could reflect morphological adaptations to different habitats (Fandos & Reig, ). Other authors have studied deer behaviour assessing the role of antler in reproductive activity (Clutton‐Brock, ; Geist, ; Hoem et al , ) and agonistic behaviour patterns of roe deer (Kurt, ), and the genetic components in antler dimensions (Geist, ; Hartl, Apollonio & Mattioli, ).…”

The modular organization of roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) body during ontogeny: the effects of sex and habitat

“…As a small artiodactyl, the roe deer is characterized by biological plasticity and great adaptability demonstrated by their survival under a wide variety of environmental conditions [ 18 , 71 – 76 ]. The body as an integrated unit responds to selective pressures of variable environmental conditions through production of reorganized phenotypes.…”

“…6 Map of Serbia with sampled localities. Circles designate populations samples from open habitats, squares from closed habitats (see Table 3 and Milošević-Zlatanović et al [ 18 ] for full description) …”

“…The animal body is a complex structure comprised from different genetic, developmental, functional and evolutionary modules constructed on a body plan. Modularity of the body as a whole was out of focus in contemporary eco-evo-devo studies, although a large number of studies of the modularity of different body parts exists, on both, inter- and intraspecific levels [ 10 – 18 ].…”

“…Adaptation to wide variety of environments and habitats influenced the social organization and spatial behaviour of roe deer populations [ 19 ], where availability and configuration of woodland habitats have an important role. Differences in social and spatial behaviour of roe deer populations in open and closed habitats have led to a long-standing distinction in between “forest” and “field” roe deer based on morphological and genetic variation [ 18 , 20 – 24 ].…”