Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Long or Heavy? Physiological Constraints in the Evolution of Antlers

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Mammalian Evolution Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The evolution of the investment in exaggerated secondary sexual traits is a topic of great interest for scientists. Despite antlers in the family Cervidae being one of the most interesting allometric structures, the nature of the relationships between antler and body size, and the influence of physiological factors driving the evolution of these characters, still remain unclear. In this paper, I examine these relationships in depth using the largest sample size ever studied (43 species). Under the hypothesis that antler growth may be limited by skeleton size as this process requires the allocation of huge amounts of mineral resources to the antlers, skeleton-related variables may more accurately explain these allometric relationships. The existence of physiological constraints should therefore be more clearly highlighted when studying the relationships between body size variables and the relative investment in the antler (measured as length or mass of antler per kg of skeleton). Results show that antler length is best described as being linearly related to head-body length rather than other measurements of size, and antler weight has a quadratic relationship with body mass. However, the relative investment in antler length (related to skeleton mass) is independent of body size variables, while the relative investment in antler mass has a quadratic relationship with shoulder height. The results obtained for antler mass reflect the existence of physiological constraints in the evolution of antlers, which are greater for larger sized species. On the other hand, the evolution of antler length may be linked to other factors, most probably sociobiological and biomechanical ones.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barnes TG, Varner LW, Blankenship LH, Fillinger TJ, Heineman SC (1990) Macro and trace mineral content of selected south Texas deer forages. J Range Manage 43:220-223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baxter BJ, Andrews RN, Barrell GK (1999) Bone turnover associated with antler growth in red deer (Cervus elaphus). Anat Rec 256:14–1

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bonduriansky R (2007) Sexual selection and allometry: a critical reappraisal of the evidence and ideas. Evolution 61:838-849

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bro-Jørgensen J (2007) The intensity of sexual selection predicts weapon size in male bovids. Evolution 61:1316–1326

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bruinderink GWTAG, Lammertsma DR, Hazebroek E (2000) Effects of cessation of supplemental feeding on mineral status of red deer Cervus elaphus and wild boar Sus scrofa in the Netherlands. Acta Theriol 45:71-85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clutton-Brock TH, Albon SD, Gibson RM, Guinness FE (1979) The logical stag: adaptive aspects of fighting in red deer (Cervus elaphus L.). Anim Behav 27:211–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clutton-Brock TH, Albon SD, Harvey PH (1980) Antlers, body size and breeding group size in the Cervidae. Nature 285:565–567

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Currey JD (1979) Mechanical properties of bone with greatly differing functions. J Biomech 12:13–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Currey JD, Landete-Castillejos T, Estevez J, Ceacero F, Olguin A, Garcia A, Gallego L (2009) The mechanical properties of deer antler bone when used in fighting. J Exp Biol 212:3985–3993

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Felsenstein J (1985) Phylogenies and the comparative method. Am Nat 125:1–15

  • Gaspar-Lopez E, Landete-Castillejos T, Estevez JA, Ceacero F, Gallego L, Garcia AJ (2010) Biometrics, testosterone, cortisol and antler growth cycle in Iberian red stags (Cervus elaphus hispanicus). Reprod Domest Anim 45:243–249

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Geist V (1974) On the relationship of social evolution and ecology in ungulates. Am Zool 14:205–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geist V, Bayer M (1988) Sexual dimorphism in the Cervidae and its relation to habitat. J Zool 214:45-53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gómez JA, Ceacero F, Landete-Castillejos T, Gaspar-López E, García AJ, Gallego L (2012) Factors affecting antler investment in Iberian red deer. Anim Prod Sci 52:867–873

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gould SJ (1973) Positive allometry of antlers in the “ Irish elk ”, Megaloceros giganteus. Nature 244:375–376

  • Grace ND, Castillo-Alcalá F, Wilson PR (2008) Amounts and distribution of mineral elements associated with liveweight gains of grazing red deer (Cervus elaphus). New Zeal J Agr Res 51:439–449

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Huxley J (1931) The relative size of antlers of deer. Proc Zool Soc London 101:819–864

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson HE, Bleich VC, Krausman PR (2007) Mineral deficiencies in tule elk, Owens Valley, California. J Wildl Dis 43:61–74

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson HE, Bleich VC, Krausman PR, Koprowski JL (2007) Effects of antler breakage on mating behavior in male tule elk (Cervus elaphus nannodes). Eur J Wildlife Res 53:9-15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landete-Castillejos T, Currey JD, Ceacero F, Garcia AJ, Gallego L, Gomez S (2012) Does nutrition affect bone porosity and mineral tissue distribution in deer antlers? The relationship between histology, mechanical properties and mineral composition. Bone 50: 245–254

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Landete-Castillejos JD, Estevez JA, Fierro Y, Calatayud A, Ceacero F, Garcia AJ, Gallego L (2010) Do drastic weather effects on diet influence changes in chemical composition, mechanical properties and structure in deer antlers? Bone 47:815–825

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Landete-Castillejos T, Estevez JA, Martínez A, Ceacero F, García JA, Gallego L (2007) Does chemical composition of antler bone reflect the physiological effort made to grow it? Bone 40:1095–1102

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lemaître JF, Gaillard JM (2013) Male survival patterns do not depend on male allocation to sexual competition in large herbivores. Behav Ecol 24:421–428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lemaître JF, Vanpé C, Plard F, Gaillard JM (2014) The allometry between secondary sexual traits and body size is nonlinear among cervids. Biol Lett 10:20130869

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln GA (1992) Biology of antlers. J Zool 226:517–528

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattioli S (2011) Family Cervidae (deer). In: Wilson DE, Mittermeier RA (eds) Handbook of the Mammals of the World, Vol. 2. Hoofed Mammals. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, pp 350–407

    Google Scholar 

  • Muir PD, Sykes AR, Barrell GK (1987) Calcium metabolism in red deer (Cervus elaphus) offered herbages during antlerogenesis: kinetic and stable balance studies. J Agric Sci 109:357–364

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ohlson M, Staaland H (2001) Mineral diversity in wild plants: benefits and bane for moose. Oikos 94:442-454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Packard GC (2013) Is logarithmic transformation necessary in allometry? Biol J Linn Soc 109:476–486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Packard GC (2015) Allometric variation in the antlers of cervids: a comment on Lemaître et al. Biol Lett 11:20140923

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Petrie M (1988) Intraspecific variation in structures that display competitive ability: large animals invest relatively more. Anim Behav 36:1174-1179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plard F, Bonenfant C, Gaillard JM (2011) Revisiting the allometry of antlers among deer species: male–male sexual competition as a driver. Oikos 120:601–606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rabinowitz A, Myint T, Khaing ST, Rabinowitz S (1999) Description of the leaf deer (Muntiacus putaoensis), a new species of muntjac from northern Myanmar. J Zool 249:427–435

  • Řežábek J, Bubenik AB (1963) The metabolism of phosphorus and iodine in deer. Translation Series AEC-tr-5631, U. S. Atomic Energy Commission

  • Rucker R, Storms D (2002) Interspecies comparisons of micronutrient requirements: metabolic vs. absolute body size. J Nutr 132:2999–3000

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Techawiboonwong A, Song HK, Leonard MB, Wehrli RW (2008) Cortical bone water: in vivo quantification with ultrashort eco-time MR imaging. Radiology 248:824–833

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Wagenmakers EJ, Farrell S (2004) AIC model selection using Akaike weights. Psychon B Rev 11:192–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace V, Davies AS (1985) Pre- and post-rut body composition of red deer stags. In: Fennessy PF, Drew KR (eds) Biology of Deer Production, Royal Society of New Zealand, Bulletin no. 22, Wellington, pp 291–293

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author thanks M. Komárková, J.L. Ros-Santaella, J. Pluhacek, L. Bartoš, and two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments. This work has been funded by the projects MZERO0714 (Ministry of Agriculture), and IGA-20155013 (Faculty of Tropical AgriSciences - CULS).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Animal Science and Food Processing, Faculty of Tropical AgriSciences, Czech University of Life Sciences, Kamýcká 129, 165 21, Prague 6, Suchdol, Czech Republic

    Francisco Ceacero

  2. Department of Ethology, Institute of Animal Science, Přátelství 815, 104 00, Praha, Uhříněves, Czech Republic

    Francisco Ceacero

Authors
  1. Francisco Ceacero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Francisco Ceacero.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ceacero, F. Long or Heavy? Physiological Constraints in the Evolution of Antlers. J Mammal Evol 23, 209–216 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10914-015-9310-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10914-015-9310-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation