Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26899422›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of animal ecology2016

Des différences, pourquoi? Transmission, maintenance and effects of phenotypic variance.

Floriane Plard, Jean-Michel Gaillard, Tim Coulson, Shripad Tuljapurkar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of animal ecology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Floriane PlardDepartment of Biology, Stanford University, Herrin Labs 454, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA.
Jean-Michel GaillardUniversité de Lyon F-69000 Lyon, Université Lyon 1; CNRS, UMR5558, Laboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Évolutive, F-69622, Villeurbanne, France.
Tim CoulsonDepartment of Zoology, University of Oxford, Tinbergen Building, South Parks Road, Oxford, OX1 3PS, UK.
Shripad TuljapurkarDepartment of Biology, Stanford University, Herrin Labs 454, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA.

Funding

Research Networks in Biodemography and Demography of AgingR24AG039345 · NIA · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI TULJAPURKAR, SHRIPAD D. · 2010 to 2014
$1.2M
NIA NIH HHS R24 AG039345NIA NIH HHS R24AG039345
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the observed distribution of variable individual phenotypes, survival and reproductive performance in wild populations, models of population dynamics often focus on mean demographic rates. Populations are constituted by individuals with different phenotypes and thus different performances. However, many models of population dynamics provide no understanding of the influence of this phenotypic variation on population dynamics. In this paper, we investigate how the relationships between demographic rates and phenotype distribution influence the transmission and the upholding of phenotypic variation, and population dynamics. We used integral projection models to measure associations between differences of phenotypic trait (size or mass) among individuals and demographic rates, growth and inheritance, and then quantify the influence of phenotypic variation on population dynamics. We build an analytical and general model resulting from simplifications assuming small phenotypic variance. We illustrate our model with two case studies: a short- and a long-lived life history. Population growth rate r is determined by a Lotka style equation in which survival and fertility are averaged over a phenotypic distribution that changes with age. Here, we further decomposed r to show how much it is affected by shifts in phenotypic average as well as variance. We derived the elasticities of r to the first and second derivative of each demographic rate. In particular, we show that the nonlinearity of change in selective pressure with phenotype matters more to population dynamics than the strength of this selection. In other words, the variance of a given trait will be most important when the strength of selection increases (or decreases) nonlinearly with that trait. Inheritance shapes the distribution of newborn phenotypes. Even if newborns have a fixed average phenotype, the variance among newborns increases with phenotypic variance among mothers, strength of inheritance and developmental variation. We explain how the components of inheritance can influence phenotypic variance and thus the demographic rates and population dynamics. In particular, when mothers of different ages produce offspring of different mean phenotype, the inheritance function can have a large influence on both the mean and variance of the trait at different ages and thus on the population growth rate. We provide new tools to understand how phenotypic variation influences population dynamics and discuss in which life histories we expect this influence to be large. For instance, in our short-lived life history, individual variability has larger effect than in our long-lived life history. We conclude by indicating future directions of analysis.

Indexed as

HeredityModels, GeneticPhenotypeAnimalsDemographyPopulation DynamicsPopulation Growthgrowth rateheritabilityindividual heterogeneityinheritanceintegral projection modelphenotypic variationpopulation dynamicssize structure

Identifiers

PMID26899422
PMCPMC6761928

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.