Literature DB >> 22862682

Phenological mismatch strongly affects individual fitness but not population demography in a woodland passerine.

Thomas E Reed1, Stephanie Jenouvrier, Marcel E Visser.   

Abstract

Populations are shifting their phenology in response to climate change, but these shifts are often asynchronous among interacting species. Resulting phenological mismatches can drive simultaneous changes in natural selection and population demography, but the links between these interacting processes are poorly understood. Here we analyse 37 years of data from an individual-based study of great tits (Parus major) in the Netherlands and use mixed-effects models to separate the within- and across-year effects of phenological mismatch between great tits and caterpillars (a key food source for developing nestlings) on components of fitness at the individual and population levels. Several components of individual fitness were affected by individual mismatch (i.e. late breeding relative to the caterpillar food peak date), including the probability of double-brooding, fledgling success, offspring recruitment probability and the number of recruits. Together these effects contributed to an overall negative relationship between relative fitness and laying dates, that is, selection for earlier laying on average. Directional selection for earlier laying was stronger in years where birds bred on average later than the food peak, but was weak or absent in years where the phenology of birds and caterpillars matched (i.e. no population mismatch). The mean number of fledglings per female was lower in years when population mismatch was high, in part because fewer second broods were produced. Population mismatch had a weak effect on the mean number of recruits per female, and no effect on mean adult survival, after controlling for the effects of breeding density and the quality of the autumnal beech (Fagus sylvatica) crop. These findings illustrate how climate change-induced mismatch can have strong effects on the relative fitness of phenotypes within years, but weak effects on mean demographic rates across years. We discuss various general mechanisms that influence the extent of coupling between breeding phenology, selection and population dynamics in open populations subject to strong density regulation and stochasticity.
© 2012 The Authors. Journal of Animal Ecology © 2012 British Ecological Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22862682     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2012.02020.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Ecol        ISSN: 0021-8790            Impact factor:   5.091


  60 in total

1.  Changing seasonality and phenological responses of free-living male arctic ground squirrels: the importance of sex.

Authors:  Michael J Sheriff; Melanie M Richter; C Loren Buck; Brian M Barnes
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2013-07-08       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Natal dispersal based on past and present environmental phenology in the pied flycatcher (Ficedula hypoleuca).

Authors:  J Hušek; H M Lampe; T Slagsvold
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2013-12-03       Impact factor: 3.225

3.  Does the temporal mismatch hypothesis match in boreal populations?

Authors:  Emma Vatka; Seppo Rytkönen; Markku Orell
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2014-07-15       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Trophic level responses differ as climate warms in Ireland.

Authors:  Alison Donnelly; Rong Yu; Lingling Liu
Journal:  Int J Biometeorol       Date:  2014-11-08       Impact factor: 3.787

5.  Climate-induced phenological shifts in a Batesian mimicry complex.

Authors:  Christopher Hassall; Jac Billington; Thomas N Sherratt
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-12-03       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 6.  Strengthening the evidence base for temperature-mediated phenological asynchrony and its impacts.

Authors:  Jelmer M Samplonius; Angus Atkinson; Christopher Hassall; Katharine Keogan; Stephen J Thackeray; Jakob J Assmann; Malcolm D Burgess; Jacob Johansson; Kirsty H Macphie; James W Pearce-Higgins; Emily G Simmonds; Øystein Varpe; Jamie C Weir; Dylan Z Childs; Ella F Cole; Francis Daunt; Tom Hart; Owen T Lewis; Nathalie Pettorelli; Ben C Sheldon; Albert B Phillimore
Journal:  Nat Ecol Evol       Date:  2020-12-14       Impact factor: 15.460

7.  No phenotypic plasticity in nest-site selection in response to extreme flooding events.

Authors:  Liam D Bailey; Bruno J Ens; Christiaan Both; Dik Heg; Kees Oosterbeek; Martijn van de Pol
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2017-06-19       Impact factor: 6.237

8.  A New Framework for Urban Ecology: An Integration of Proximate and Ultimate Responses to Anthropogenic Change.

Authors:  Jenny Q Ouyang; Caroline Isaksson; Chloé Schmidt; Pierce Hutton; Frances Bonier; Davide Dominoni
Journal:  Integr Comp Biol       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 3.326

9.  Creative citizen science illuminates complex ecological responses to climate change.

Authors:  Abraham J Miller-Rushing; Amanda S Gallinat; Richard B Primack
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-01-04       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  Evidence for r- and K-selection in a wild bird population: a reciprocal link between ecology and evolution.

Authors:  Bernt-Erik Sæther; Marcel E Visser; Vidar Grøtan; Steinar Engen
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2016-04-27       Impact factor: 5.349

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.