Preface to the Princeton Landmarks in Biology Edition vii Preface xi Symbols Used xiii 1. The Importance of Islands 3 2. Area and Number of Speicies 8 3. Further Explanations of the Area-Diversity Pattern 19 4. The Strategy of Colonization 68 5. Invasibility and the Variable Niche 94 6. Stepping Stones and Biotic Exchange 123 7. Evolutionary Changes Following Colonization 145 8. Prospect 181 Glossary 185 References 193 Index 201

The Theory of Island Biogeography

So far in this course we have dealt entirely with the evolution of characters that are controlled by simple Mendelian inheritance at a single locus. There are notes on the course website about gametic disequilibrium and how allele frequencies change at two loci simultaneously, but we didn’t discuss them. In every example we’ve considered we’ve imagined that we could understand something about evolution by examining the evolution of a single gene. That’s the domain of classical population genetics. For the next few weeks we’re going to be exploring a field that’s actually older than classical population genetics, although the approach we’ll be taking to it involves the use of population genetic machinery. If you know a little about the history of evolutionary biology, you may know that after the rediscovery of Mendel’s work in 1900 there was a heated debate between the “biometricians” (e.g., Galton and Pearson) and the “Mendelians” (e.g., de Vries, Correns, Bateson, and Morgan). Biometricians asserted that the really important variation in evolution didn’t follow Mendelian rules. Height, weight, skin color, and similar traits seemed to

Human biochemical genetics

Predation has long been implicated as a major selective force in the evolution of several morphological and behavioral characteristics of animals. The importance of predation during evolutionary ti...

Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus

One of the major concerns with a potential change in climate is that an increase in extreme events will occur. Results of observational studies suggest that in many areas that have been analyzed, changes in total precipitation are amplified at the tails, and changes in some temperature extremes have been observed. Model output has been analyzed that shows changes in extreme events for future climates, such as increases in extreme high temperatures, decreases in extreme low temperatures, and increases in intense precipitation events. In addition, the societal infrastructure is becoming more sensitive to weather and climate extremes, which would be exacerbated by climate change. In wild plants and animals, climate-induced extinctions, distributional and phenological changes, and species' range shifts are being documented at an increasing rate. Several apparently gradual biological changes are linked to responses to extreme weather and climate events.

https://www7.nau.edu/mpcer/direnet/publications/publications_e/files/Easterling_et_al_2000.pdf

Climate Extremes: Observations, Modeling, and Impacts

To a first approximation, the distribution of biodiversity across the Earth can be described in terms of a relatively small number of broad-scale spatial patterns. Although these patterns are increasingly well documented, understanding why they exist constitutes one of the most significant intellectual challenges to ecologists and biogeographers. Theory is, however, developing rapidly, improving in its internal consistency, and more readily subjected to empirical challenge.

Global patterns in biodiversity

Food limitation is an important issue in ecology because it can influence life history traits, population sizes, and community structure (through effects of competition). Work at the level of populations and communities has led to arguments that food limitation and competition are more important in winter than during the breeding season (e.g. 1, 2, 7, 8, 83, 85, 211, 234). In fact, it is commonly argued that food is superabundant during the breeding season (7, 8, 161, 213, 246, 250, 251, 308-311). However, such arguments are based on indirect rather than direct evidence of the effects of food on reproduction and survival (fitness) (149). Direct evidence for food limitation and competition in winter exists when survival is affected, and some experimental evidence suggests such effects (e.g. 75, 113, 122, 132). However, if current or future reproductive success is limited by food, then food limitation will also exist during the breeding season. Reproductive ecologists historically have argued that food limits reproductive success (e.g. 13, 297). Yet, even this school has included recent arguments against food limitation. For instance, Ettinger & King (77) think that perching time of birds commonly reflects loafing time because birds set their clutch and brood sizes based on years and periods of stringent (low food) conditions. However, perching time may not reflect loafing but rather an important time commitment to reproductive success (T. Martin, unpublished ms.) Thus, the status of food limitation in breeding birds is not clear. Here, I review evidence for food limitation in the context of life history theory because it provides a fundamental framework from which to interpret

Food as a limit on breeding birds: a life-history perspective

Food limitation is generally thought to underlie much of the variation in life history traits of birds. I examined variation and covariation of life history traits of 123 North American Passeriformes and Piciformes in relation to nest sites, nest predation, and foraging sites to examine the possible roles of these ecological factors in life history evolution of birds. Annual fecundity was strongly inversely related to adult survivaI, even when phylogenetic effects were controlled. Only a little of the variation in fecundity and survival was related to foraging sites, whereas these traits varied strongly among nest sites. Interspecific differences in nest predation were correlated with much of the variation in life history traits among nest sites, although energy trade-offs with covarying traits also may account for some variation. For example, increased nest predation is associated with a shortened nestling period and both are associated with more broods per year, but number of broods is inversely correlated with clutch size, possibly due to an energy trade-off. Number of broods was much more strongly correlated with annual fecundity and adult survival among species than was clutch size, suggesting that clutch size may not be the primary fecundity trait on which selection is acting. Ultimately, food limitation may cause trade-offs between annual fecundity and adult survival, but differences among species in tecundity and adult survival may not be explained by differences in food abundance and instead represent differing tactics for partitioning similar levels of food limitation. Variation in fecundity and adult survival is more clearly organized by nest sites and more closely correlated with nest predation; species that use nest sites with greater nest predation have shorter nestling periods and more broods, yielding higher fecundity, which in turn is associated with reduced adult survival. Fecundity also varied with migratory tendencies; short-distance migrants had more broods and greater fecundity than did neotropical migrants and residents using similar nest sites. HowevEr, migratory tendencies and habitat use were confounded, making separation of these two effects difficult. Nonetheless, the conventional view that neotropical migrants have fewer broods than residents was not supported when nest site effects were controlled

/pdf/avian-life-history-evolution-in-relation-to-nest-sites-nest-13hbw844ew.pdf

Avian Life History Evolution in Relation to Nest Sites, Nest Predation, and Food

/pdf/handbook-of-field-methods-for-monitoring-landbirds-3mxtt71f7n.pdf

Handbook of Field Methods for Monitoring Landbirds

Audubon's Hermit Thrushes (Catharus guttatus auduboni) in central Arizona have a low nesting success (7 to 20%) due almost exclusively to nest predation. We examine the sites chosen for nesting and compare them to nonuse sites randomly selected within the vegetation types associated with nests. Hermit Thrush nest sites differ from nonuse sites primarily in that nest sites have more small (1to 3-m tall) white firs (Abies concolor) in the patch (5-m radius circle) surrounding the nest. Hermit Thrushes nest almost exclusively in small white firs and they do not forage in or near them. Hermit Thrushes may select nest sites that have a large number of other potential nest sites (i.e., small white firs) near the nest because predation risk is thereby reduced. Indeed, nests with a high probability of predation were surrounded by a lower density of small white firs than more successful nests. However, low predation nests also were more concealed than high predation nests. Nestsite selection appears to be a function of characteristics in the immediate vicinity of the nest (concealment, overhead cover, nest orientation), but also on a larger scale surrounding the nest. Consideration of nest-site selection on this larger scale may cast light on the question of whether nest sites limit territory and habitat selection by birds.

Nest Predation and Nest-Site Selection of a Western Population of the Hermit Thrush

Alexander Skutch hypothesized that increased parental activity can increase the risk of nest predation. We tested this hypothesis using ten open-nesting bird species in Arizona, USA. Parental activity was greater during the nestling than incubation stage because parents visited the nest frequently to feed their young during the nestling stage. However, nest predation did not generally increase with parental activity between nesting stages across the ten study species. Previous investigators have found similar results. We tested whether nest site effects might yield higher predation during incubation because the most obvious sites are depredated most rapidly. We conducted experiments using nest sites from the previous year to remove parental activity. Our results showed that nest sites have highly repeatable effects on nest predation risk; poor nest sites incurred rapid predation and caused predation rates to be greater during the incubation than nestling stage. This pattern also was exhibited in a bird species with similar (i.e. controlled) parental activity between nesting stages. Once nest site effects are taken into account, nest predation shows a strong proximate increase with parental activity during the nestling stage within and across species. Parental activity and nest sites exert antagonistic influences on current estimates of nest predation between nesting stages and both must be considered in order to understand current patterns of nest predation, which is an important source of natural selection.

Thomas E. Martin

Papers

Food as a limit on breeding birds: a life-history perspective

Avian Life History Evolution in Relation to Nest Sites, Nest Predation, and Food

Handbook of Field Methods for Monitoring Landbirds

Nest Predation and Nest-Site Selection of a Western Population of the Hermit Thrush

Nest predation increases with parental activity: separating nest site and parental activity effects.