4.6 Article

Phenotypic quality influences fertility in Gombe chimpanzees

Journal

JOURNAL OF ANIMAL ECOLOGY
Volume 79, Issue 6, Pages 1262-1269

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2010.01687.x

Keywords

chimpanzee; demography; fertility; life-history theory; phenotypic quality

Funding

  1. The Jane Goodall Institute (JGI)
  2. NIH/NICHD [K01HD051494]
  3. Harris Steel Group
  4. University of Minnesota
  5. NSF [DBS-9021946, SBR-93109909, II-0431141, BCS-0648481]
  6. NIH [R01 AI058715]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

P>1. Fertility is an important fitness component, but is difficult to measure in slowly reproducing, long-lived animals such as chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). 2. We measured fertility and the effect of measured covariates on fertility in a 43-year sample of birth intervals of chimpanzees from the Gombe National Park, Tanzania using Cox proportional hazards regression with individual-level random effects. 3. The birth hazard declined with mothers' age at a rate of 0 center dot 84 per year following age at first reproduction. This value is somewhat stronger than previous estimates. 4. Loss of the infant that opened the birth interval increased the birth hazard 134-fold. 5. Birth intervals following the first complete birth interval were shorter than this first interval, while sex of the previous infant had no significant effect. 6. Maternal dominance rank was significant at the P < 0 center dot 1 level when coded as high/middle/low but was highly significant when we simply considered high rank vs. others. 7. Individual heterogeneity had a substantial impact on birth interval duration. We interpret this individual effect as a measure of phenotypic quality, controlling for the measured covariates such as dominance rank. This interpretation is supported by the correlation of individual heterogeneity scores with similar independent measures of body mass.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available