Oecologia

pp 1–13 | Cite as

Tall young females get ahead: size-specific fecundity in wild kangaroos suggests a steep trade-off with growth

  • Louise Quesnel
  • Wendy J. King
  • Graeme Coulson
  • Marco Festa-Bianchet
Behavioral ecology –original research

Abstract

When resources are limited, organisms face allocation conflicts. Indeterminate growth creates a persistent conflict with reproduction, as growth may enhance future reproduction, but diverts resources from current reproduction. Little is known about allocation trade-offs in mammals with indeterminate growth. We studied growth and reproduction in adult female eastern grey kangaroos (Macropus giganteus), an iteroparous mammal with indeterminate growth. Allocation trajectories varied with age and size: for 4-year-old females, fecundity increased from 30 to 82% from shortest to average-sized individuals. Older females had high fecundity regardless of size. The smallest females grew 30% more annually than average-sized females, but females that reached average size at an older age had lower growth rates. Environmental conditions affected allocation to size and reproduction. Rainy springs increased fecundity from 61 to 84% for females that had previously reproduced, but rainy winters reduced leg growth. Females in better relative condition grew 40% more than average, whereas most young of females below average relative condition failed to survive to 10 months of age. These results highlight an age-specific trade-off between growth and reproduction. Tall young females benefit from a smaller trade-off between somatic growth and early fecundity than shorter females of the same age, but older females appear to favor reproduction over growth regardless of size. Our study highlights how individual heterogeneity determines trade-offs between life-history components. We speculate that cohort effects affect age-specific reproductive success in this long-lived mammal.

Keywords

Allocation Indeterminate growth Life history Macropus giganteus Reproductive success 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank all students, collaborators, and assistants who helped us monitor kangaroos at Wilsons Promontory National Park, in particular Allison MacKay and Dave Forsyth. We acknowledge Parks Victoria staff for logistical support. Handling of animals was authorized by the University of Melbourne Animal Ethics Committee (0810628.1, 0911512.1, and 1312902.1), the Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment (1004582, 1005558, and 100007062), and by the Université de Sherbrooke Animal Care Committee (MFB2012-02), affiliated with the Canadian Council on Animal Care. This study was supported by the National Geographic Society, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, the Fonds de Recherche Québécois en Nature et Technologies, and the Ministère de l’Éducation, du Loisir et du Sport du Québec.

Author contribution statement

All conducted fieldwork and collected data; LQ analyzed and interpreted the data, and wrote the manuscript; LQ and MFB designed and executed the study; WJK, GC, and MFB provided editorial advice during the writing of the manuscript.

Supplementary material

442_2017_4003_MOESM1_ESM.docx (2.2 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 2228 kb)

References

  1. Allal N, Sear R, Prentice AM, Mace R (2004) An evolutionary model of stature, age at first birth and reproductive success in Gambian women. Proc R Soc Biol Sci 271:465–470. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2003.2623 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alonso-Alvarez C, Bertrand S, Faivres B, Sorci G (2007) Increased susceptibility to oxidative damage as a cost of accelerated somatic growth in zebra finches. Funct Ecol 21:873–879. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2435.2007.01300.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Banks PB, Newsome AE, Dickman CR (2000) Predation by red foxes limits recruitment in populations of eastern grey kangaroos. Austral Ecol 25:283–291. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1442-9993.2000.01039.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker BM, Walker SC (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Softw 67:1–51. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beauplet G, Guinet C (2007) Phenotypic determinants of individual fitness in female fur seals: larger is better. Proc R Soc Biol Sci 274:1877–1883. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2007.0454 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beauplet G, Barbraud C, Dabin W et al (2006) Age-specific survival and reproductive performances in fur seals: evidence of senescence and individual quality. Oikos 112:430–441. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0030-1299.2006.14412.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blanckenhorn W (1999) Different growth responses to temperature and resource limitation in three fly species with similar life histories. Evol Ecol 13:395–409. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006741222586 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bolton BL, Newsome AE, Merchant JC (1982) Reproduction in the agile wallaby Macropus agilis (Gould) in the tropical lowlands of the Northern Territory: opportunism in a seasonal environment. Aust J Ecol 7:261–277. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.1982.tb01505.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Burnham KP, Anderson DR, Huyvaert KP (2011) AIC model selection and multimodel inference in behavioral ecology: some background, observations, and comparisons. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 65:23–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-010-1029-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chaloupka M, Limpus C, Miller J (2004) Green turtle somatic growth dynamics in a spatially disjunct Great Barrier Reef metapopulation. Coral Reefs 23:325–335. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-004-0387-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Choudhury S, Black JM, Owen M (1996) Body size, fitness and compatibility in barnacle geese, Branta leucopsis. Int J Avian Sci 138:700–709. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.1996.tb04772.x Google Scholar
  13. Clutton-Brock TH, Albon SD, Guinness FE (1985) Parental investment and sex differences in juvenile mortality in birds and mammals. Nature 313:131–133. https://doi.org/10.1038/313131a0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cripps JK, Wilson ME, Elgar MA, Coulson G (2011) Experimental manipulation of fertility reveals potential lactation costs in a free-ranging marsupial. Biol Lett 7:859–862. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2011.0526 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Davis NE, Coulson G, Forsyth DM (2008) Diets of native and introduced mammalian herbivores in shrub-encroached grassy woodland, south-eastern Australia. Wildl Res 35:684–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Davis NE, Forsyth DM, Coulson G (2010) Facilitative interactions between an exotic mammal and native and exotic plants: hog deer (Axis porcinus) as seed dispersers in south-eastern Australia. Biol Invasions 12:1079–1092. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-009-9525-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dmitriew CM (2011) The evolution of growth trajectories: what limits growth rate? Biol Rev 86:97–116. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-185X.2010.00136.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Dobson FS, Michener GR (1995) Maternal traits and reproduction in Richardson’s ground squirrels. Ecology 76:851–862. https://doi.org/10.2307/1939350 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Festa-Bianchet M, Gaillard J-M, Jorgenson JT (1998) Mass- and density-dependent reproductive success and reproductive costs in a capital breeder. Am Nat 152:367–379. https://doi.org/10.1086/286175 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Fisher DO (1999) Offspring sex ratio variation in the bridled nailtail wallaby, Onychogalea fraenata. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 45:411–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fisher DO, Blomberg SP, Owens IPF (2002) Convergent maternal strategies and ungulates and macropods. Evolution (N Y) 56:167–176. https://doi.org/10.1554/0014-3820-2002-056 Google Scholar
  22. Folkvord A, Jørgensen C, Korsbrekke K et al (2014) Trade-offs between growth and reproduction in wild Atlantic cod. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 71:1106–1112. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfas-2013-0600 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 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 70:721–729. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0021-8790.2001.00532.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gaillard J-M, Festa-Bianchet M, Yoccoz NG (1998) Population dynamics of large herbivores: variable recruitment with constant adult survival. Trends Ecol Evol 13:58–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(97)01237-8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Gaillard J-M, Festa-Bianchet M, Yoccoz NG et al (2000a) Temporal variation in fitness components and populations dynamics of large herbivores. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 31:367–393. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.31.1.367 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gaillard JM, Festa-Bianchet M, Delorme D, Jorgenson J (2000b) Body mass and individual fitness in female ungulates: bigger is not always better. Proc Biol Sci 267:471–477. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2000.1024 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Gélin U, Wilson ME, Coulson GM, Festa-Bianchet M (2013) Offspring sex, current and previous reproduction affect feeding behaviour in wild eastern grey kangaroos. Anim Behav 86:885–891. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2013.08.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gélin U, Wilson ME, Coulson G, Festa-Bianchet M (2015) Experimental manipulation of female reproduction demonstrates its fitness costs in kangaroos. J Anim Ecol 84:239–248. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.12266 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Gélin U, Coulson G, Festa-Bianchet M (2016a) Heterogeneity in reproductive success explained by individual differences in bite rate and mass change. Behav Ecol 27:777–783. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arv209 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gélin U, Wilson ME, Cripps J et al (2016b) Individual heterogeneity and offspring sex affect the growth—reproduction trade-off in a mammal with indeterminate growth. Oecologia 180:1127–1135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-015-3531-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Gelman A (2008) Scaling regression inputs by dividing by two standard deviations. Stat Med 27:2865–2873. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.3107 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Green WCH, Rothstein A (1991) Trade-offs between growth and reproduction in female bison. Oecologia 86:521–527. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00318318 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Hamel S, Côté SD, Gaillard J-M, Festa-Bianchet M (2009a) Individual variation in reproductive costs of reproduction: high-quality females always do better. J Anim Ecol 78:143–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2008.01459.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Hamel S, Gaillard J-M, Festa-Bianchet M, Côté SD (2009b) Individual quality, early-life conditions, and reproductive success in contrasted populations of large herbivores. Ecology 90:1981–1995. https://doi.org/10.1890/08-0596.1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Hayward AD, Mar KU, Lahdenperä M, Lummaa V (2014) Early reproductive investment, senescence and lifetime reproductive success in female Asian elephants. J Evol Biol 27:772–783. https://doi.org/10.1111/jeb.12350 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. Heino M, Kaitala V (1999) Evolution of resource allocation between growth and reproduction in animals with indeterminate growth. J Evol Biol 12:423–429. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1420-9101.1999.00044.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Helle S (2008) A tradeoff between reproduction and growth in contemporary Finnish women. Evol Hum Behav 29:189–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.11.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Johnsson JI, Bohlin T (2006) The cost of catching up: increased winter mortality following structural growth compensation in the wild. Proc Biol Sci 273:1281–1286. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2005.3437 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. Karkach AS (2006) Trajectories and models of individual growth. Demogr Res 15:347–400. https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2006.15.12 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. King WJ, Goldizen AW (2016) Few sex effects in the ontogeny of mother-offspring relationships in eastern grey kangaroos. Anim Behav 113:59–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2015.12.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. King WJ, Wilson ME, Allen T et al (2011) A capture technique for free-ranging eastern grey kangaroos (Macropus giganteus) habituated to humans. Aust Mammal 33:47–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. King WJ, Festa-Bianchet M, Coulson G, Goldizen AW (2017) Long-term consequences of mother-offspring associations in eastern grey kangaroos. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-017-2297-1 Google Scholar
  43. Kirkpatrick TH (1965) Studies of Macropodidae in Queensland: 2. Age estimation in the grey kangaroo, the red kangaroo, the eastern wallaroo and the red-necked wallaby, with notes on dental abnormalities. Queensl J Agric Anim Sci 22:301–3017Google Scholar
  44. Landete-Castillejos T, García A, Lopez-Serrano FR, Gallego L (2005) Maternal quality and differences in milk production and composition for male and female Iberian red deer calves (Cervus elaphus hispanicus). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 57:267–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-004-0848-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Langvatn R, Mysterud A, Stenseth NC, Yoccoz NG (2004) Timing and synchrony of ovulation in red deer constrained by short northern summers. Am Nat 163:763–772. https://doi.org/10.1086/383594 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Lardner B, Loman J (2003) Growth or reproduction? Resource allocation by female frogs Rana temporaria. Oecologia 137:541–546CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Le Cren ED (1951) The length-weight relationship and seasonal cycle in gonad weight and condition in the perch (Perca fluviatilis). J Anim Ecol 20:201–219. https://doi.org/10.2307/1540 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Le Gall-Payne C, Coulson G, Festa-Bianchet M (2015) Supersize me: heavy eastern grey kangaroo mothers have more sons. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 69:795–804. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-015-1896-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lunn NJ, Boyd IL, Croxall JP (1994) Reproductive performance of female Antarctic fur seals: the influence of age, breeding experience, environmental variation and individual quality. J Anim Ecol 63:827–840. https://doi.org/10.2307/5260 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Madsen T, Shine R (2000) Silver spoons and snake body sizes: prey availability early in life influences long-term growth rates of free-ranging pythons. J Anim Ecol 69:952–958. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2000.00477.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Marcil-Ferland D, Festa-Bianchet M, Martin AM, Pelletier F (2013) Despite catch-up, prolonged growth has detrimental fitness consequences in a long-lived vertebrate. Am Nat 182:775–785. https://doi.org/10.1086/673534 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Martin JGA, Festa-Bianchet M (2010) Bighorn ewes transfer the costs of reproduction to their lambs. Am Nat 176:414–423. https://doi.org/10.1086/656267 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Metcalfe NB, Monaghan P (2001) Compensation for a bad start: grow now, pay later? Trends Ecol Evol 16:254–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(01)02124-3 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Olsson M, Shine R (1996) Does reproductive success increase with age or with size in species with indeterminate growth? A case study using sand lizards (Lacerta agilis). Oecologia 105:175–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00328543 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Otterlei E, Nyhammer G, Folkvord A, Stefansson SO (1999) Temperature-and size-dependent growth of larval and early juvenile Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua): a comparative study of Norwegian coastal cod and northeast Arctic. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 56:2099–2111. https://doi.org/10.1139/f99-168 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Parker KL, Barboza PS, Gillingham MP (2009) Nutrition integrates environmental responses. Funct Ecol 23:57–69. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2435.2008.01528.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Peig J, Green AJ (2009) New perspectives for estimating body condition from mass/length data: the scaled mass index as an alternative method. Oikos 118(12):1883–1891. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0706.2009.17643.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Perez-Barberia FJ, Robles L, Nores C (1996) Horn growth pattern in Cantabrian chamois Rupicapra pyrenaica parva: influence of sex, location and phaenology. Acta Theriol (Warsz) 41:83–92. https://doi.org/10.4098/AT.arch.96-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Pettorelli N, Gaillard J-M, Van Laere G et al (2002) Variations in adult body mass in roe reer: the effects of population density at birth and of habitat quality. Proc Biol Sci 269:747–753. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2001.1791 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  60. Pomeroy PP, Fedak MA, Anderson S (1999) Consequences of maternal size for reproductive expenditure and pupping success of grey seals at North Rona, Scotland. J Anim Ecol 68:235–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Poole WE (1975) Reproduction in the two species of grey kangaroos, Macropus giganteus Shaw and M. fuliginosus (Desmarest) II. Gestation, parturition and pouch life. Aust J Ecol 23:333–353. https://doi.org/10.1071/ZO9750333 Google Scholar
  62. Poole WE, Carpenter SM, Wood JT (1982) Growth of grey kangaroos and the reliability of age determination from body measurements I. The eastern grey kangaroo, Macropus giganteus. Aust Wildl Res 9:9–20. https://doi.org/10.1071/WR9820009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Quesnel L, MacKay A, Forsyth DM et al (2017) Size, sex and offspring sex affect milk composition and juvenile survival in wild eastern grey kangaroos. J Zool. https://doi.org/10.1111/jzo.12453 Google Scholar
  64. Robert KA, Schwanz LE, Mills HR (2010) Offspring sex varies with maternal investment ability: empirical demonstration based on cross-fostering. Biol Lett 6:242–245. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2009.0774 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Roff DA (2002) Life history evolution, First. Sinauer Associates, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  66. Rughetti M, Festa-Bianchet M (2011) Effects of early horn growth on reproduction and hunting mortality in female chamois. J Anim Ecol 80:438–447. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2010.01773.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Rughetti M, Dematteis A, Meneguz PG, Festa-Bianchet M (2015) Age-specific reproductive success and cost in female Alpine ibex. Oecologia 178:197–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-014-3192-3 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Russell EM (1989) Maternal behavior in Macropodoidea. In: Griggs GC, Jarman P, Hume ID (eds) Kangaroos, wallabies and rat-kangaroos. Surrey Beattie & Sons, Chipping Norton, pp 549–569Google Scholar
  69. Sæther BE (1997) Environmental stochasticity and population dynamics of large herbivores: a search for mechanisms. Trends Ecol Evol 12:143–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(96)10068-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Sand H (1996) Life history patterns in female moose (Alces alces): the relationship between age, body size, fecundity and environmental conditions. Oecologia 106:212–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00328601 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Servanty S, Gaillard J-M, Toïgo C et al (2009) Pulsed resources and climate-induced variation in the reproductive traits of wild boar under high hunting pressure. J Anim Ecol 78:1278–1290. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2009.01579.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Simard MA, Huot J, De Bellefeuille S, Côté SD (2014) Linking conception and weaning success with environmental variation and female body condition in a northern ungulate. J Mammal 95:311–327. https://doi.org/10.1644/13-MAMM-A-036 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Smith SM, Nager RG, Costantini D (2016) Meta-analysis indicates that oxidative stress is both a constraint on and a cost of growth. Ecol Evol 6:2833–2842. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.2080 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  74. Sparkman A, Arnold S, Bronikowski A (2007) An empirical test of evolutionary theories for reproductive senescence and reproductive effort in the garter snake Thamnophis elegans. Proc R Soc Biol Sci 274:943–950. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2006.0072 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Stearns SC (1992) The evolution of life histories. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  76. Stearns SC, Koella JC (1986) The evolution of phenotypic plasticity in life-history traits: predictions of reaction norms for age and size at maturity. Evolution (N Y) 40:893–913. https://doi.org/10.2307/2408752 Google Scholar
  77. Sunnucks P, Taylor AC (1997) Sex of pouch young related to maternal weight in Macropus eugenii and M. parma (Marsupialia: Macropodidae). Aust J Zool 45:573–578. https://doi.org/10.1071/ZO97038 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Toïgo C, Gaillard JM, Gauthier D et al (2002) Female reproductive success and costs in an alpine capital breeder under contrasting environments. Écoscience 9:427–433. https://doi.org/10.1080/11956860.2002.11682730 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Trivers RL, Willard DE (1973) Natural selection of parental ability to vary the sex ratio of offspring. Science 179:90–92CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Tuomi J, Hakala T, Haukioja E (1983) Alternative concepts of reproductive effort, costs of reproduction, and selection in life-history evolution. Am Zool 23:25–34. https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/23.1.25 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Tyndale-Biscoe CH, Janssens PA (eds) (1988) The developing marsupial: models for biomedical research. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  82. van Noordwijk AJ, de Jong G (1986) Acquisition and allocation of resources: their influence on variation in life history tactics. Am Nat 128:137–142. https://doi.org/10.1086/284547 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. West GB, Brown JH, Enquist BJ (2001) A general model for ontogenetic growth. Nature 413:628–631. https://doi.org/10.1038/35098076 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Département de biologieUniversité de SherbrookeSherbrookeCanada
  2. 2.School of BioSciencesUniversity of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations