How Life History Influences Population Dynamics in Fluctuating Environments

Abstract

A major question in ecology is how age-specific variation in demographic parameters influences population dynamics. Based on long-term studies of growing populations of birds and mammals, we analyze population dynamics by using fluctuations in the total reproductive value of the population. This enables us to account for random fluctuations in age distribution. The influence of demographic and environmental stochasticity on the population dynamics of a species decreased with generation time. Variation in age-specific contributions to total reproductive value and to stochastic components of population dynamics was correlated with the position of the species along the slow-fast continuum of life-history variation. Younger age classes relative to the generation time accounted for larger contributions to the total reproductive value and to demographic stochasticity in "slow" than in "fast" species, in which many age classes contributed more equally. In contrast, fluctuations in population growth rate attributable to stochastic environmental variation involved a larger proportion of all age classes independent of life history. Thus, changes in population growth rates can be surprisingly well explained by basic species-specific life-history characteristics. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. Submitted December 17, 2012; Accepted June 19, 2013; Electronically published October 25, 2013 abstract: A major question in ecology is how age-specific variation in demographic parameters influences population dynamics. Based on long-term studies of growing populations of birds and mammals, we analyze population dynamics by using fluctuations in the total reproductive value of the population. This enables us to account for random fluctuations in age distribution. The influence of demographic and environmental stochasticity on the population dynamics of a species decreased with generation time. Variation in age-specific contributions to total reproductive value and to stochastic components of population dynamics was correlated with the position of the species along the slow-fast continuum of life-history variation. Younger age classes relative to the generation time accounted for larger contributions to the total reproductive value and to demographic stochasticity in "slow" than in "fast" species, in which many age classes contributed more equally. In contrast, fluctuations in population growth rate attributable to stochastic environmental variation involved a larger proportion of all age classes independent of * Corresponding author; e-mail: bernt.erik.sather@bio.ntnu.no.Am. Nat. 2013. Vol. 182, pp. 743-759. ᭧ 2013 by The University of Chicago. 0003-0147/2013/18206-54347$15.00. All rights reserved. DOI: 10.1086/67349...

Broodmate aggression and life history variation in accipitrid birds of prey

“…Notwithstanding these criticisms, our results fit remarkably well with Simmons' (1988Simmons' ( , 1991 original claim that intense broodmate aggression in accipitrid raptors is a behavioral trait characteristically associated to a slow life history pace (Saether et al, 2013), that is, a low reproductive effort (low fertility and restrained parental expenditure) suggesting a long life span and a high subadult-to-adult mortality ratio. Among birds, longevity and adult survival are negatively correlated with annual fertility (eggs/year; Bennett & Harvey, 1988;Bennett & Owens, 2002;Ricklefs, 2000) or clutch size (Linden & Møller, 1989;Martin, 1995) and with parental effort in nest attentiveness (Martin, 2002), chick provisioning (Bortolotti, 1986a) and anti-predator defence (Ghalambor & Martin, 2001).…”

“…Such a relationship is consistent with the idea that where extrinsic factors cause little adult mortality, parental effort is restrained to reduce reproduction-related mortality and preserve the potentially long life span of individuals (Charlesworth, 1994;Ricklefs, 2000). More specifically, demographic models of life history evolution predict that reproductive effort should decrease if the ratio of extrinsic adult to juvenile (prebreeding) mortality is high (Charnov & Schaffer, 1973;Murphy, 1968;Ricklefs, 2010;Saether et al, 2013;Stearns, 1976).…”

“…Heavier offspring may be able to acquire more food, survive periods of food shortage, or spend less time foraging and more time watching for predators (Briga, Koetsier, Boonekamp, Jimeno, & Verhulst, 2017;Sullivan, 1989). Selection for aggressive competition may be particularly strong in species with a slow life history because (1) restrained parental provisioning effort may not fully compensate for environmental fluctuations in resources (Bókony et al, 2009;Bortolotti, 1986a), and (2) a suboptimal growth has a comparatively higher fitness penalty because lifetime reproductive success depends more on survival than on fertility (Murphy, 1968;Saether et al, 2013).…”

What do you mean, ‘resilient’?

“…One might measure the level of disease exposure required to cause infection ('resistance'); the rate of evolution of an exaggerated display trait when sexual selection is relaxed ('elasticity') [8]; how long it takes for primary forest to recover from hurricane damage ('return time'); the magnitude of cull that flips a population beyond the Allee threshold [9] towards certain extinction ('latitude'); or how close a disturbed coral reef is to tipping into an algae-dominated system ('precariousness') [10]. In any study of resilience it is crucial to (i) define and model the system; (ii) define and measure the system state that is at risk; (iii) define the stable states to which the system might recover; and (iv) define the magnitude, frequency, and structure of disturbance [11].…”

Age-specific survival and annual variation in survival of female chamois differ between populations

“…Gaillard et al 2000). This has important implications for population dynamics (Benton et al 2006;Saether et al 2013) through age-specific contribution to the population growth rate (Coulson et al 2005). Age structure has been shown to influence how the population is affected by harvesting (e.g.…”