Theory in Biosciences

, Volume 133, Issue 3–4, pp 165–173 | Cite as

Scaling of the mean and variance of population dynamics under fluctuating regimes

  • Cino Pertoldi
  • S. Faurby
  • D. H. Reed
  • J. Knape
  • M. Björklund
  • P. Lundberg
  • V. Kaitala
  • V. Loeschcke
  • L. A. Bach
Original Paper


Theoretical ecologists have long sought to understand how the persistence of populations depends on the interactions between exogenous (biotic and abiotic) and endogenous (e.g., demographic and genetic) drivers of population dynamics. Recent work focuses on the autocorrelation structure of environmental perturbations and its effects on the persistence of populations. Accurate estimation of extinction times and especially determination of the mechanisms affecting extinction times is important for biodiversity conservation. Here we examine the interaction between environmental fluctuations and the scaling effect of the mean population size with its variance. We investigate how interactions between environmental and demographic stochasticity can affect the mean time to extinction, change optimal patch size dynamics, and how it can alter the often-assumed linear relationship between the census size and the effective population size. The importance of the correlation between environmental and demographic variation depends on the relative importance of the two types of variation. We found the correlation to be important when the two types of variation were approximately equal; however, the importance of the correlation diminishes as one source of variation dominates. The implications of these findings are discussed from a conservation and eco-evolutionary point of view.


Environmental variability Effective population size Extinction Scaling effect Temporal autocorrelations in the environment 



This study has been partly supported by a Marie Curie Transfer of Knowledge Fellowship BIORESC of European Community’s Sixth Framework Programme (contract number MTKD-CT-2005-029957). Furthermore we wish to thank the Aalborg Zoo Conservation Foundation (AZCF) and the Danish Natural Science Research Council for financial support to CP (Grant number: #21-01-0526, #21-03-0125 and 95095995). We thank two anonymous reviewers for invaluable suggestions and help.


  1. Ballantyne F, Kerkhoff AJ (2007) The observed range for temporal mean-variance scaling exponents can be explained by reproductive correlation. Oikos 116:174–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Björklund M, Ranta E, Kaitala V, Bach LA, Lundberg P (2011) Environmental fluctuations and level of density-compensation strongly affects the probability of fixation and fixation times. Bull Math Biol 73:1666–1681PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boyce MS, Haridas CV, Lee CT, NCEAS (2006) Stochastic demography working group: demography in an increasing variable world. Trends Ecol Evol 21:141–148PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Braumann CA (2008) Growth and extinction of populations in randomly varying environments. Comput Math Appl 56:631–644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cardillo M, Mace GM, Gittleman JL, Purvis A (2006) Latent extinction risk and the future battlegrounds of mammal conservation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:4157–4161PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Courchamp F, Berec J, Gascoigne J (2008) Allee effects in ecology and conservation. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Davies TJ, Allen AP, Borda-de-Água L, Rergetz J, Melian CJ (2011) Neutral biodiversity can explain the imbalance of phylogenetic trees but not the tempo of their diversification. Evolution 65:1841–1850PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dennis B, Ponciano JM, Lele SR, Taper ML, Staples DF (2006) Estimating density dependence, process noise, and observation error. Ecol Monogr 76(3):323–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Engen S, Øyvind Bakke Ø, Islam A (1998) Demographic and environmental stochasticity-concepts and definitions. Biometrics 54:840–846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Faurby S, Funch P (2011) Size is not everything: a meta-analysis of geographic variation in microscopic eukaryotes. Global Ecol Biogeogr 20:475–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fenchel T, Finlay BJ (2004) Response. BioScience 54:885–886CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Foley P (1994) Predicting extinction times from environmental stochasticity and carrying-capacity. Conserv Biol 8:124–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Frankham R (1995) Effective population size/adult population size ratios in wildlife: a review. Genet Res 66:95–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fritz SA, Bininda-Edmonds ORP, Andy P (2009) Geographical variation in predictors of mammalian extinction risk: big is bad, but only in the tropics. Ecol Lett 12:538–549please delete from the refrence list all the reference mentioned inQ4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Grimm V, Wissel C (2004) The intrinsic mean time to extinction: a unifying approach to analysing persistence and viability of populations. Oikos 105:501–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Halley JM, Inchausti P (2004) The increasing importance of 1/f-noises as models of ecological variability. Fluct Noise Lett 4:R1–R26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Halley J, Kunin W (1999) Extinction risk and the 1/f family of noise models. Theor Popul Biol 56:215–239PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Heino M, Ripa J, Kaitala V (2000) Extinction risk under coloured environmental noise. Ecography 23:177–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Inchausti P, Halley J (2003) On the relation between temporal variability and persistence time in animal populations. J Anim Ecol 72:899–908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kamenev A, Meerson B, Shklovskii B (2008) How colored environmental noise affects population extinction. Phys Rev Lett 101:268103PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kohlmann SG, Schmidt GA, Garcelon DK (2005) A population viability analysis for the island fox on Santa Catalina Island, California. Ecol Model 183:77–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lande R (1993) Risks of population extinction from demographic and environmental stochasticity and random catastrophes. Am Nat 142:911–927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Legendre S, Schoener TW, Clobert J, Spiller DA (2008) How is extinction risk related to population size variability over time? A family of models for species with repeated extinction and immigration. Am Nat 172:282–298PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Leigh EG (1981) The average lifetime of a population in a varying environment. J Theor Biol 90:213–239PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lewontin RC, Cohen D (1969) On population growth in a randomly varying environment. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 62:1056–1060PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Liao W, Reed DH (2009) Inbreeding-environment interactions increase extinction risk. Anim Conserv 12:54–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nicol SC, Possingham HP (2010) Should metapopulation restoration strategies increase patch area or number of patches. Ecol Appl 20:566–581PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ovaskainen O, Hanski I (2004) Metapopulation dynamics in highly fragmented landscapes. In: Hanski I, Gaggiotti OE (eds) Ecology, genetics and evolution of metapopulations. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 73–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Parmesan C (2006) Ecological and evolutionary responses to recent climate change. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 37:637–669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Peña TS, Johst K, Grimm V, Arntz W, Tarazona J (2005) Population dynamics of a polychaete during three El Nino events: disentangling biotic and abiotic factors. Oikos 111:253–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pertoldi C, Bach LA, Loeschcke V (2008) On the brink between extinction and persistence. Biol Direct 3:47PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pertoldi C, Bach LA, Barker JSF, Lundberg P, Loeschcke V (2007) The consequences of the variance-mean rescaling effect on effective population size. Oikos 116:769–774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pimm S (1993) Life on an intermittent edge. Trends Ecol Evol 8:45–46PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ranta E, Kaitala V, Bjorklund M, Lundberg P, Bach L, Stenseth NC (2008) Environmental forcing and genetic differentiation in subdivided populations. Evol Ecol Res 10:1–9Google Scholar
  35. Reed DH (2004) Extinction risk in fragmented habitats. Anim Conserv 7:181–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Reed DH (2008) The effects of population size on population viability: From mutation to environmental catastrophes. In: Carroll SP, Fox CW (eds) Conservation biology: evolution in action. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 16–34Google Scholar
  37. Reed DH (2010) Albatrosses, eagles, and newts, oh my!: Exceptions to the prevailing paradigm concerning genetic diversity and population viability? Anim Conserv 13:448–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Reed DH, O’Grady JJ, Brook BW, Ballou JD, Frankham R (2003) Estimates of minimum viable population sizes for vertebrates and factors influencing those estimates. Biol Conserv 113:23–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rice S (2009) A stochastic version of the Price equation reveals the interplay of deterministic and stochastic processes in evolution. BMC Evol Biol 8:262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ripa J, Lundberg P (1996) Noise colour and the risk of population extinctions. Proc Roy Soc Lond B 263:1751–1753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ruokolainen L, Lindén A, Kaitala V, Fowler MS (2009) Ecological and evolutionary dynamics under coloured environmental variation. Trends Ecol Evol 24:555–563PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Saltz D, Rubenstein DI, White GC (2005) The impact of increased environmental stochasticity due to climate change on the dynamics of Asiatic wild ass. Conserv Biol 20:1402–1409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sinclair ARE (1996) Mammal populations: fluctuation, regulation, life history theory and their implications for conservation. In: Floyd RB, Sheppard AW, De Barro PJ (eds) Frontiers of population ecology. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne, pp 127–154Google Scholar
  44. Sæther BE, Engen S (2003) Routes to extinction. In: Blackburn T, Gaston K (eds) Macroecology. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, pp 218–236Google Scholar
  45. Taylor LR (1961) Aggregation, variance and the mean. Nature 189:732–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Taylor LR, Woiwod IP (1982) Comparative synoptic dynamics. 1. Relationships between interspecific and interspecific spatial and temporal variance mean population parameters. J Anim Ecol 51:879–906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Traill LW, Brook BW, Frankham RR, Bradshaw CJA (2010) Pragmatic population viability targets in a rapidly changing world. Biol Conserv 143:28–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tuljapurkar S, Haridas CV (2006) Temporal autocorrelation and stochastic population growth. Ecol Lett 9(3):327–337PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Vandermeer J, Lin BB (2008) The importance of matrix quality in fragmented landscapes: understanding ecosystem collapse through a combination of deterministic and stochastic factors. Ecol Complex 5:222–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wilson AJ, Pemberton JM, Pilkington JG, Coltman DW, Mifsud DV, Clutton-Brock TH, Kruuk LEB (2006) Environmental coupling of selection and heritability limits evolution. PLoS Biol 7:1270–1275Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cino Pertoldi
    • 1
    • 2
  • S. Faurby
    • 3
    • 4
  • D. H. Reed
    • 3
    • 5
  • J. Knape
    • 6
  • M. Björklund
    • 7
  • P. Lundberg
    • 8
  • V. Kaitala
    • 9
  • V. Loeschcke
    • 3
    • 5
  • L. A. Bach
    • 10
  1. 1.Department of Biotechnology, Chemistry and Environmental Engineering, Section of Biology and Environmental ScienceAalborg UniversityAalborgDenmark
  2. 2.Aalborg ZooAalborgDenmark
  3. 3.Department of BioSciencesAarhus UniversityAarhus CDenmark
  4. 4.Department of Ecology and Evolutionary BiologyUniversity of California Los AngelesLos AngelesUSA
  5. 5.Department of BiologyUniversity of LouisvilleLouisvilleUSA
  6. 6.Department of Environmental Science, Policy and ManagementUniversity of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA
  7. 7.Department of Animal Ecology, Evolutionary Biology Centre (EBC)Uppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden
  8. 8.Department of Theoretical Ecology, Ecology BuildingLund UniversityLundSweden
  9. 9.Integrative Ecology Unit, Department of BiosciencesUniversity of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland
  10. 10.Interacting Minds CentreAarhus UniversityAarhus CDenmark

Personalised recommendations