2007
DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2007.2141
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Optimal annual routines: behaviour in the context of physiology and ecology

Abstract: Organisms in a seasonal environment often schedule activities in a regular way over the year. If we assume that such annual routines have been shaped by natural selection then life-history theory should provide a basis for explaining them. We argue that many life-history trade-offs are mediated by underlying physiological variables that act on various time scales. The dynamics of these variables often preclude considering one period of the year in isolation. In order to capture the essence of annual routines, … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
149
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 174 publications
(152 citation statements)
references
References 129 publications
3
149
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The baseline case of this version (table 1) is identical to the baseline energy-constraint case except that (i) background mortality is reduced, (ii) foraging incurs a predation risk, and (iii) foraging is more stochastic ( ). We introduce more stochasticity because, in K p 40 contrast to the energy-constraint case, we want the birds to be able to control their probability of starvation (see McNamara and Houston 1987;Houston and McNamara 1993). By comparing predictions of the two versions, we are able to understand what effects are primarily a consequence of energy constraints and what additional effects are the result of a trade-off between mortality (starvation and predation) and reproduction.…”
Section: Results From the Predation-risk Versionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The baseline case of this version (table 1) is identical to the baseline energy-constraint case except that (i) background mortality is reduced, (ii) foraging incurs a predation risk, and (iii) foraging is more stochastic ( ). We introduce more stochasticity because, in K p 40 contrast to the energy-constraint case, we want the birds to be able to control their probability of starvation (see McNamara and Houston 1987;Houston and McNamara 1993). By comparing predictions of the two versions, we are able to understand what effects are primarily a consequence of energy constraints and what additional effects are the result of a trade-off between mortality (starvation and predation) and reproduction.…”
Section: Results From the Predation-risk Versionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The evolution of metabolic rate will depend on the negative effects of energy expenditure. As McNamara and Houston (2008) point out, hard work (i.e., a high rate of energy expenditure) has a variety of negative effects that act on different timescales. In this article, we have included a state variable that represents relatively short-term effects.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similarly, Heath et al (2007) demonstrated that diving models based on rate maximization (Kramer 1988;Houston & Carbone 1992) were inadequate to explain diving patterns of foraging eider ducks, probably owing to longer term processes such as digestion. Behavioural routines can be influenced by a variety of physiological and ecological processes with different timescales, resulting in dynamics that may not be easily explained without formal analysis and precluding their study in isolation (McNamara et al 1987;McNamara & Houston 2008).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They are also influenced by environment, which usually varies on multiple time scales, including daily, sea-sonally, annually, inter-annually and across decades. Where seasonal variation in food resources is high and predictable, animals should change their foraging strategies over the course of the year, and seasonal foraging strategies should be nested in a larger overarching annual strategy or routine (McNamara & Houston 2008).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%