4.4 Article

Reproductive Asynchrony in Spatial Population Models: How Mating Behavior Can Modulate Allee Effects Arising from Isolation in Both Space and Time

期刊

AMERICAN NATURALIST
卷 175, 期 3, 页码 362-373

出版社

UNIV CHICAGO PRESS
DOI: 10.1086/650373

关键词

two-sex population model; critical patch size; mate-searching behavior; age-dependent male reproductive success; density-dependent mating success; demographically effective population density

资金

  1. National Science Foundation (NSF) [DEB-0624163, DMS-0514839, DMS-0816068]
  2. European Union PATtern RESilience (PATRES) [NEST 43268]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mate finding, which is essential to both population growth and gene exchange, involves both spatial and temporal components. From a population dynamics perspective, spatial mate-finding problems are well studied, and decreased mate-finding efficiency at low population densities is a well-recognized mechanism for the Allee effect. Temporal aspects of mate finding have been rarely considered, but reproductive asynchrony may engender an Allee effect in which some females go mateless by virtue of temporal isolation. Here we develop and explore a model that unifies previously disparate theoretical considerations of spatial and temporal aspects of mate finding. Specifically, we develop a two-sex reaction-diffusion system to examine the interplay between reproductive asynchrony and the dispersal of individuals out of a patch. We also consider additional behavioral complications, including several alternative functional forms for mating efficiency and advective movements in which males actively seek out females. By calculating the fraction of females expected to go mateless as a joint function of reproductive asynchrony and patch size, we find that the population-level reproductive rates necessary to offset female matelessness may be quite high. These results suggest that Allee effects engendered by reproductive asynchrony will be greatly exacerbated in spatially isolated populations.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据