38,370 research outputs found
Selection and Segregation Distortion in a Sex-Differentiated Population
No full textthis paper, we will focus on the interaction of selection and segregation distortion, which is harder to analyze and less well understood (e.g., Taylor and Jonker, 1978; Weissing, 1991; Hofbauer and Sigmund, 1998). In this case, w ij should be interpreted as the fitness of an individual of genotype A i A j viewed from the perspective of allele A i . Hence, our model explicitly takes the point of view of the allele instead of that of the genotyp
Lactation patterns of pinnipeds are not explained by optimization of maternal energy delivery rates
No full textTrillmich F, Weissing FJ. Lactation patterns of pinnipeds are not explained by optimization of maternal energy delivery rates. BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY AND SOCIOBIOLOGY. 2006;60(2):137-149.Within pinnipeds, phocids and otariids show differing maternal care. strategies. Phocids rear young out of body stores in a yearly cycle with a single stay ashore when the mother fasts while lactating, whereas otariids provision their young by repeated foraging trips to sea alternating with brief stays ashore where they suckle their young. In a previous optimality model, these differences have been interpreted as adaptations based on differing energy requirements of large (phocid) and smaller (otariid) species, and the time budget of the large elephant and the much smaller Antarctic fur seal were correctly predicted. Our refined model-extended to pinniped species of all sizes-predicts lactation strategies to shift from attendance cycles to 1-year cycles with increasing body mass and provides an explanation for the finding that phocid pups are weaned at lower relative mass than otariid pups. However, other predictions do not correspond to empirical findings. In particular, the model does not explain the behavior of large otariids and small phocids. Thus, maternal metabolic requirements alone appear insufficient to explain observed lactation patterns. In the light of our results, we discuss more generally the scope and limitations of optimality models when applied in a comparative framework to a group of related species
Why plankton communities have no equilibrium: solutions to the paradox
No full textIn a classical paper, Hutchinson (1961) argued that the large number of species in most plankton communities is remarkable in view of the competitive exclusion principle, which suggests that in homogeneous, well-mixed environments species that compete for the same resources cannot coexist. Few ideas in aquatic ecology have evoked more research than this `paradox of the plankton'. This review is an effort to put the main solutions to the paradox that have been proposed over the years into perspective. Hutchinson himself already suggested that the explanation could be that plankton communities are not in equilibrium at all due to weather-driven fluctuations. Subsequent research confirmed that such externally imposed variability can allow many species to coexist. Another important point is that in practice the homogeneous well-mixed conditions assumed in the competitive exclusion principle hardly exist. Even the open ocean, for instance, has a spatial complexity resulting from meso-scale vortices and fronts that can facilitate coexistence of species. Perhaps most excitingly, theoretical work on species interactions has given a counter-intuitive new dimension to the understanding of diversity. Various competition and predation models suggest that even in homogeneous and constant environments plankton will never settle to equilibrium. Instead, interactions between multiple species may give rise to oscillations and chaos, with a continuous wax and wane of species within the community. Long-term laboratory experiments support this view. This chaotic behavior implies among other things that plankton dynamics are intrinsically unpredictable in the long run when viewed in detail. Nonetheless, on a higher aggregation level, indicators such as total algal biomass may show quite regular patterns
Evidence for the decay B0→J/ψω and measurement of the relative branching fractions of meson decays to J/ψη and J/ψη′
Get PDFFirst evidence of the B 0 → J / ψ ω decay is found and the B s 0 → J / ψ η and B s 0 → J / ψ η ′ decays are studied using a dataset corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 1.0 fb -1 collected by the LHCb experiment in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of sqrt(s) = 7 TeV. The branching fractions of these decays are measured relative to that of the B 0 → J / ψ ρ 0 decay:frac(B (B 0 → J / ψ ω), B (B 0 → J / ψ ρ 0)) = 0.89 ± 0.19 (stat) - 0.13 + 0.07 (syst),frac(B (B s 0 → J / ψ η), B (B 0 → J / ψ ρ 0)) = 14.0 ± 1.2 (stat) - 1.5 + 1.1 (syst) - 1.0 + 1.1 (frac(f d, f s)),frac(B (B s 0 → J / ψ η ′), B (B 0 → J / ψ ρ 0)) = 12.7 ± 1.1 (stat) - 1.3 + 0.5 (syst) - 0.9 + 1.0 (frac(f d, f s)), where the last uncertainty is due to the knowledge of f d / f s, the ratio of b-quark hadronization factors that accounts for the different production rate of B 0 and B s 0 mesons. The ratio of the branching fractions of B s 0 → J / ψ η ′ and B s 0 → J / ψ η decays is measured to befrac(B (B s 0 → J / ψ η ′), B (B s 0 → J / ψ η)) = 0.90 ± 0.09 (stat) - 0.02 + 0.06 (syst)
Optimal floating and queuing strategies: The logic of territory choice
Get PDFThis is a response to a recent article by Hanna Kokko and William J. Sutherland (American Naturalist 152:354-366), who consider evolutionarily stable territory acceptance rules for animals that face the decision between settling on a poor territory now (which is then retained for life) or waiting for better habitat to become available later (taking a chance of dying before reproducing). In contrast to these authors, we argue that the evolutionarily stable threshold quality above which territories are acceptable does depend on whether individuals compete for a single territory (queuing) or For multiple territories (floating) and also on whether access to territories is determined by a hierarchy among waiting individuals. More specifically, we show the following: First, if the choice is between floating and settling, the evolutionarily stable acceptance threshold is such that threshold territories yield an expected lifetime reproductive success (LRS) of 1 - mu(F), the survival probability of a floater. Second, if the choice is between queuing and settling, the evolutionarily stable threshold may correspond to any LRS between 1 - mu(F) and unity. Third, the number of nonbreeding individuals in the population is maximized at a threshold of unity. In other words, the evolutionarily stable threshold does not maximize the nonbreeding Fraction of the population. We argue that models of territory choice should carefully specify the mechanism of choice because some choice processes (e.g., indiscriminate habitat use above the threshold) do not admit an evolutionarily stable acceptance rule
Biodiversity of plankton by species oscillations and chaos
No full textBiodiversity has both fascinated and puzzled biologists(1). In aquatic ecosystems, the biodiversity puzzle is particularly troublesome, and known as the 'paradox of the plankton'(2). Competition theory predicts that, at equilibrium, the number of coexisting species cannot exceed the number of limiting resources(3-6). For phytoplankton, only a few resources are potentially limiting: nitrogen, phosphorus, silicon, iron, light, inorganic carbon, and sometimes a few trace metals or vitamins. However, in natural waters dozens of phytoplankton species coexist(2). Here we offer a solution to the plankton paradox. First, we show that resource competition models(6-10) can generate oscillations and chaos when species compete for three or more resources. Second we show that these oscillations and chaotic fluctuations in species abundances allow the coexistence of many species on a handful of resources. This model of planktonic biodiversity may be broadly applicable to the biodiversity of many ecosystems. [KEYWORDS: Limited growth; competition; phytoplankton; communities limitation; hypothesis]
An explanatory framework for adaptive personality differences
No full textWe develop a conceptual framework for the understanding of animal personalities in terms of adaptive evolution. We focus on two basic questions. First, why do behavioural types exhibit limited behavioural plasticity, that is, behavioural correlations both across contexts and over time? Second, how can multiple behavioural types coexist within a single population? We emphasize differences in 'state' among individuals in combination with state-dependent behaviour. Some states are inherently stable and individual differences in such states can explain stable differences in suites of behaviour if it is adaptive to make behaviour in various contexts dependent on such states. Behavioural stability and cross-context correlations in behaviour are more difficult to explain if individual states are potentially more variable. In such cases stable personalities can result from state-dependent behaviour if state and behaviour mutually reinforce each other by feedback mechanisms. We discuss various evolutionary mechanisms for the maintenance of variation (in states and/or behaviour), including frequency-dependent selection, spatial variation with incomplete matching between habitat and phenotype, bet-hedging in a temporally fluctuating environment, and non-equilibrium dynamics. Although state differences are important, we also discuss how social conventions and social signalling can give rise to adaptive personality differences in the absence of state differences
Adult sex ratio variation: Implications for breeding system evolution
No full textAdult sex ratio (ASR) exhibits immense variation in nature, although neither the causes nor the implications of this variation are fully understood. According to theory, the ASR is expected to influence sex roles and breeding systems, as the rarer sex in the population has more potential partners to mate with than the more common sex. Changes in mate choice, mating systems and parental care suggest that the ASR does influence breeding behaviour, although there is a need for more tests, especially experimental ones. In the context of breeding system evolution, the focus is currently on operational sex ratios (OSRs). We argue that the ASR plays a role of similar importance and urge researchers to study the ASR and the OSR side by side. Finally, we plead for a dynamic view of breeding system evolution with feedbacks between mating, parenting, OSR and ASR on both ecological and evolutionary time scales
Competition for nutrients and light among phytoplankton species in a mixed water column: Theoretical studies
No full textA brief overview is given of modelling studies that aim to analyse the effects of nutrient and light limitations on the development of phytoplankton communities and lead to a qualitative understanding of the competitive interactions involved
- …
