Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32529317›Full record

ReviewOecologia2020

Ontogenetic niche shifts as a driver of seasonal migration.

Wimke Fokkema, Henk P van der Jeugd, Thomas K Lameris, Adriaan M Dokter, Barwolt S Ebbinge, André M de Roos, Bart A Nolet, Theunis Piersma, Han Olff

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Oecologia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. A theoretical framework for scaling ecological niches from individuals to species.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

9 authors.

Wimke FokkemaConservation Ecology Group, Groningen Institute for Evolutionary Life Sciences (GELIFES), Univ. of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Henk P van der JeugdDepartment of Animal Ecology, Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO-KNAW), Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5332-9526
Thomas K LamerisDepartment of Animal Ecology, Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO-KNAW), Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7023-3406
Adriaan M DokterDepartment of Animal Ecology, Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO-KNAW), Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6573-066X
Barwolt S EbbingeWageningen Environmental Research, Wageningen Univ. and Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
André M de RoosDepartment of Theoretical and Computational Ecology, Institute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics (IBED), Univ. of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6944-2048
Bart A NoletDepartment of Animal Ecology, Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO-KNAW), Wageningen, The Netherlands. b.nolet@nioo.knaw.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7437-4879
Theunis PiersmaConservation Ecology Group, Groningen Institute for Evolutionary Life Sciences (GELIFES), Univ. of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9668-466X
Han OlffConservation Ecology Group, Groningen Institute for Evolutionary Life Sciences (GELIFES), Univ. of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2154-3576

Funding

Waddenfonds WF 209925
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ontogenetic niche shifts have helped to understand population dynamics. Here we show that ontogenetic niche shifts also offer an explanation, complementary to traditional concepts, as to why certain species show seasonal migration. We describe how demographic processes (survival, reproduction and migration) and associated ecological requirements of species may change with ontogenetic stage (juvenile, adult) and across the migratory range (breeding, non-breeding). We apply this concept to widely different species (dark-bellied brent geese (Branta b. bernicla), humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) and migratory Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha) to check the generality of this hypothesis. Consistent with the idea that ontogenetic niche shifts are an important driver of seasonal migration, we find that growth and survival of juvenile life stages profit most from ecological conditions that are specific to breeding areas. We suggest that matrix population modelling techniques are promising to detect the importance of the ontogenetic niche shifts in maintaining migratory strategies. As a proof of concept, we applied a first analysis to resident, partial migratory and fully migratory populations of barnacle geese (Branta leucopsis). We argue that recognition of the costs and benefits of migration, and how these vary with life stages, is important to understand and conserve migration under global environmental change.

Indexed as

Animal MigrationSalmonAnimalsPopulation DynamicsReproductionSeasonsBarnacle gooseDark-bellied brent gooseHumpback whaleMatrix population modellingOntogenyPacific salmonReproductionSeasonal migration

Identifiers

PMID32529317
PMCPMC7320946

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.