, Volume 146, Issue 4, pp 521–530 | Cite as

Density-dependent responses of fawn cohort body mass in two contrasting roe deer populations

  • Petter Kjellander
  • Jean-Michel Gaillard
  • A. J. Mark Hewison
Population Ecology


We investigated the influence of population density on juvenile body mass in two contrasting roe deer populations, in Sweden (Bogesund) and France (Chizé), in which density was monitored for ≥15 years. We investigated the effect of population density and climatic conditions on cohort performance. We predicted that: (1) body mass of growing fawns should be sensitive to environmental changes, showing marked between-year variation (i.e., cohort effects), (2) fawns in the less productive (weakly seasonal, weakly predictable summer weather) habitat of Chizé should show stronger density-dependent responses due to more severe food competition during summer than fawns in the more productive (markedly seasonal, moderately predictable summer weather) habitat of Bogesund, and (3) fawns at Bogesund should be heavier both in absolute terms and relative to their size than their conspecifics in Chizé due to a higher degree of fat accumulation in northern environments. In both study sites we found marked cohort variation and clear effects of density, with body mass varying by as much as 29% over years. While neither summer nor winter climate influenced fawn body mass at Bogesund, fawns tended to be lighter after summers with high temperatures at Chizé. In addition, fawns were heavier after acorn mast years experienced in utero at Bogesund. As expected, the strength of the density-dependent response of fawn body mass was greater at Chizé than at Bogesund. For a given density, male fawns were consistently heavier than females in both sites. Lastly, both sexes at Bogesund had higher absolute body mass and were larger for a given body size than in Chizé. Our results clearly demonstrate that absolute density is a poor predictor of roe deer performance and supports the view that habitat quality has an overwhelming importance for determining fawn body mass in roe deer populations.


Cohort effects Density dependence Environmental stochasticity Phenotypic quality Allometry 


  1. Albon SD, Guinness FE, Clutton-Brock TH (1983) The influence of climatic variation on the birth weights of red deer (Cervus elaphus). J Zool 200:295–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Albon SD, Clutton-Brock TH, Guinnes FE (1987) Early development and population dynamics in red deer. II. Density-independent effects and cohort variation. J Anim Ecol 56:69–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andersen R, Gaillard JM, Liberg O, San José C (1998) Variation in life-history parameters in roe deer. In: Andersen R, Duncan P, Linnell JDC (eds) The European roe deer: the biology of success. Scandinavian University Press, Oslo, pp 285–307Google Scholar
  4. Andersen R, Gaillard JM, Linnell JDC, Duncan P (2000) Factors affecting maternal care in an income breeder, the European roe deer. J Anim Ecol 69:672–682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beckerman ATG, Benton T, Ranta E, Kaitala V, Lundberg P (2002) Population dynamic consequences of delayed life-history effects. TREE 17:263–269Google Scholar
  6. Begon M, Harper JL, Townsend CR (1990) Ecology individuals, populations and communities, 2nd edn. Blackwell, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  7. Boutin JM, Gaillard JM, Delorme D, Van Laere G (1987) Suivi de l’évolution de la fècondité chez le chevreuil (Capreolus capreolus) par l’observation des groupes familiaux. Gibier Faune Sauvage 4:255–265Google Scholar
  8. Burnham KP, Anderson DR (1998) Model selection and inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Caughley G (1977) Analysis of vertebrate populations. Wiley, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. Cederlund G, Lindström E (1983) Effects of severe winters and fox predation on roe deer mortality. Acta Theriol 28:129–145Google Scholar
  11. Clutton-Brock TH (1991) The evolution of parental care. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  12. Clutton-Brock TH, Albon SD, Guinness FE (1987) Reproductive success in male and female red deer. In: Clutton-Brock TH (ed) Reproductive success. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 325–343Google Scholar
  13. Clutton-Brock TH, Price OF, Albon SD, Jewell PA, (1992) Early development and population fluctuations in Soay sheep. J Anim Ecol 65:675–689Google Scholar
  14. Cook JG, Quinlan LJ, Irwin LL, Bryant LD, Riggs RA, Thomas JW (1996) Nutrition–growth relations of elk calves during late summer and fall. J Wildl Manag 60:528–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Coulson T, Catchpole EA, Albon SD, Morgan BJT, Pemberton JM, Clutton-Brock TH, Crawley MJ, Grenfell BT (2001) Age, sex, density, winter weather and population crashes in Soay sheep. Science 292:1528–1531CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Dooney JM, Gunn RG (1981) Nutritional and other factors in breeding performance of ewes. In: Gilmore D, Cook B (eds) Environmental factors in mammal reproduction. Macmillan, London, pp 169–177Google Scholar
  17. Festa-Bianchet M, Jorgenson JT, King WJ, Smith KG, Wishart WD (1996) The development of sexual dimorphism: seasonal and lifetime mass change of bighorn sheep. Can J Zool 74:330–342Google Scholar
  18. Festa-Bianchet M, Gaillard JM, Jorgenson JT (1998) Mass- and density-dependent reproductive success and reproductive costs in a capital breeder. Am Nat 152:367–379CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Forchhammer MC, Clutton-Brock TH, Lindström J, Albon SD (2001) Climate and population density induce long-term cohort variation in a northern ungulate. J Anim Ecol 70:721–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fowler CW (1987) A review of density dependence in populations of large mammals. In: Genoways HH (ed) Current mammalogy. Plenum, New York, pp 401–441Google Scholar
  21. Gaillard JM, Lebreton JD, Pontier D, Landry P (1992a) Demographic sensitivity and population management: an application to roe deer (Capreolus capreolus). In: Proceedings of the International Union of the Game Biologists Congress 18:547–550Google Scholar
  22. Gaillard JM, Sempéré AJS, Boutin JM, Van Laere G, Boisaubert B (1992b) Effects of age and body weight on the proportion of females breeding in a population of roe deer (Capreolus capreolus). Can J Zool 70:1541–1545Google Scholar
  23. Gaillard JM, Delorme D, Jullien JM (1993) Effects of cohort, sex, and birth date on body development of roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) fawns. Oecologia 94:57–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gaillard JM, Delorme D, Boutin JM, Van Laere G, Boisaubert B (1996) Body mass of roe deer fawns during winter in 2 contrasting populations. J Wildl Manag 60:29–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gaillard JM, Boutin JM, Delorme D, Van Laer G, Duncan P, Lebreton JD (1997) Early survival in roe deer: causes and consequences of cohort variation in two contrasted populations. Oecologia 112:502–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gaillard JM, Festa-Bianchet M, Delorme D, Jorgenson J (2000) Body mass and individual fitness in female ungulates: bigger is not always better. Proc R Soc Lond B 267:471–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gaillard JM, Duncan P, Delorme D, Van Laere G, Pettorelli N, Maillard D, Renaud G (2003b) Effects of Hurricane Lothar on the population dynamics of European roe deer. J Wildl Manag 67:767–773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gaillard JM, Loison A, Toïgo C, Delorme D, Van Laere G (2003a) Cohort effects and deer population dynamics. Ecoscience 10:312–320Google Scholar
  29. Geist V (1987) Bergmann’s rule is invalid. Can J Zool 65:1035–1038Google Scholar
  30. Hewison AJM (1996) Variation in the fecundity of roe deer in Britain: effects of age and body weight. Acta Theriol 41:187–198Google Scholar
  31. Hewison AJM, Vincent JP, Bideau E, Angibault JM, Putman RJ (1996) Variation in cohort mandible size as an index of roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) densities and population trends. J Zool (Lond) 239:573–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hewison AJM, Gaillard JM, Angibault JM, Van Laere G, Vincent JP (2002) The influence of density on post-weaning growth in roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) fawns. J Zool (Lond) 257:303–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Holand Ø, Mysterud A, Wannag A, Linnell JDC (1998) Roe deer in northern environments: physiology and behaviour. In: Andersen R, Duncan P, Linnell JDC (eds) The European roe deer: the biology of success. Scandinavian University Press, Oslo, pp 117–137Google Scholar
  34. Jönsson KI (1997) Capital and income breeding as alternative tactics of resource use in reproduction. OIKOS 78:57–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kjellander P (2000) Density dependence in roe deer population dynamics. PhD Thesis. Grimsö Wildlife Research Station, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala. Silvestria 154Google Scholar
  36. Langvatn R, Albon SD, Burkey T, Clutton-Brock TH (1996) Climate, plant phenology and variation in age of first reproduction in a temperate herbivore. J Anim Ecol 65:653–670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lesage L, Crête M, Huot J, Ouellet JP (2001) Evidence for a trade-off between growth and body reserves in northern white-tailed deer. Oecologia 126:30–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lindstedt SL, Boyce MS (1985) Seasonality, fasting endurance, and body size in mammals. Am Nat 125:873–878CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lindström J (1999) Early development and fitness in birds and mammals. TREE 14:343–348PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Loe LE, Bonenfant C, Mysterud A, Gaillard JM, Langvatn R, Stenseth NC, Klein F, Pettorelli N (2005) Climate predictability and breeding phenology in red deer: timing and synchrony of rutting and calving in Norway and France. J Anim Ecol (in press)Google Scholar
  41. Mauget C, Mauget R, Sempere A (1999) Energy expenditure in European roe deer fawns during the suckling period and its relationship with maternal reproductive cost. Can J Zool 77:389–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Møller AP, Jennions MD (2002) How much variance can be explained by ecologists and evolutionary biologists. Oecologia 132:492–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mysterud A, Langvatn R, Yoccoz NG, Stenseth NC (2002) Large-scale habitat variability, delayed density effects and red deer populations in Norway. J Anim Ecol 71:569–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Peek MS, Leffler AJ, Flint SD, Ryel RJ (2003) How much variance is explained by ecologists? Additional perspectives. Oecologia 137:161–170CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Peters RH (1983) The ecological implications of body size. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  46. Pettorelli N, Gaillard JM, Duncan P, Oullet JP, Van Laer G (2001) Population density and small-scale variation in habitat quality affect phenotypic quality in roe deer. Oecologia 128:400–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pettorelli N, Gaillard JM, Van Laer G, Duncan P, Kjellander P, Liberg O, Delorme D, Maillard D (2002) Density at birth and habitat quality affects adult body mass in roe deer. Proc R Soc Lond B 269:747–753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pettorelli N, Dray S, Gaillard JM, Chessel D, Duncan P, Illius A, Guillon N, Klein F, Van Laere G (2003a) Spatial variation in springtime food resources influences the winter body mass of roe deer fawns. Oecologia 137:363–369CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Pettorelli N, Gaillard JM, Duncan P, Maillard D, Van Laere G, Delorme D (2003b) Habitat quality influences both survival and movements of juvenile roe deer. Ecology 84:3307–3316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Portier C, Festa-Bianchet M, Gaillard JM, Jorgenson JT, Yoccoz NG (1998) Effects of density and weather on survival of bighorn sheep lambs (Ovis canadensis). J Zool Lond 245:271–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Post E, Stenseth NC (1999) Climatic variability, plant phenology, and northern ungulates. Ecology 80:1322–1339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. R-Development Core Team (2004) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http://www.R-project.org http://r.project.org/
  53. Rose KE, Clutton-Brock TH, Guinness FE (1998) Cohort variation in male survival and lifetime breeding success in red deer. J Anim Ecol 67:979–986CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sæther BE (1997) Environmental stochasticity and population dynamics of large herbivores: a search for mechanisms. TREE 12:143–149Google Scholar
  55. Sand H, Pehrson Å, Cederlund G (1996) Annual variation in body mass and reproductive traits in mouse Alces alces—the effects of weather conditions and food quality. In: Life history strategies in moose (Alces alces): geographical and temporal variation in body growth and reproduction. PhD Thesis. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, UppsalaGoogle Scholar
  56. Sinclair ARE (1989) Population regulation in animals. In: Cherrett JM (ed) Ecological concepts. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 197–241Google Scholar
  57. Skogland T (1983) The effects of density dependent resource limitation on size of wild reindeer. Oecologia 60:156–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Skogland T (1990) Density-dependence in a fluctuating wild rein deer herd; maternal vs. offspring effects. Oecologia 84:442–450Google Scholar
  59. Stearns SC (1992) The evolution of life histories. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  60. Strandgaard H (1972) The roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) population at Kalø and the factors regulating its size. Dan Rev Game Biol 7:1–205Google Scholar
  61. Stubbs M (1977) Density dependence in the life-cycles of animals and its importance in K- and r-strategies. J Anim Ecol 46:677–688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Van Horne B (1984) Density as a misleading indicator of habitat quality. J Wildl Manag 4:893–901Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Petter Kjellander
    • 1
  • Jean-Michel Gaillard
    • 2
  • A. J. Mark Hewison
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Conservation BiologySwedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU)RiddarhyttanSweden
  2. 2.UMR-CNRS 5558, Laboratoire de Biomètrie et Biologie EvolutiveVilleurbanne, CedexFrance
  3. 3.Comportement et Ecologie de la Faune Sauvage (CEFS)Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)Castanet-Tolosan CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations