Temporal variation in reproductive costs and payoffs shapes the flowering strategy of a neotropical milkweed, Asclepias curassavica
- 173 Downloads
A central goal of evolutionary ecology is to understand the factors that select for particular life history strategies, such as delaying reproduction. For example, environmental variation and reproductive costs to survival and growth often select for reproductive delays in semelparous and iteroparous species. In this study, we examine how variation in reproductive cost, which we define as a reduction to growth, survival, or future reproduction after a reproductive event, may select for reproductive delay in an iteroparous Neotropical milkweed with no obvious reproductive season. We analyzed demographic data collected every 3 months for 3 years from four populations of Asclepias curassavica in Monteverde, Costa Rica. We detected costs of flowering to survival and growth that varied in magnitude between our 12 transition periods without a seasonal pattern. The populations also exhibited temporal variation in reproductive payoffs measured as seedling establishment. We incorporated these reproductive costs into demographic projection models, which predicted a delayed flowering strategy only when we included temporal variation in costs and payoffs. Temporal variation in reproductive costs and payoffs is an important selective force in the evolution of delayed flowering in iteroparous species. Further, a lack of predictable seasonal pattern to reproductive costs and payoffs may contribute to the lack of seasonal reproductive patterns observed in our study species and other Neotropical species.
KeywordsDemography Life history evolution Optimality models Reproductive costs Stochastic population models
We thank J. Watkins, T. Bakke, K. Schultz, L. Kline, and L. Beveridge for their help with data collection in the field, E. Goolsby, and E. Caughlin for helpful discussion on the development on this project, S. Wenger for statistical advice, T. Dallas for computational assistance, and T. Kartzinel and D. Humphreys for providing feedback on the manuscript. We appreciate funding from the Odum School of Ecology, The Tinker Foundation, and Sigma Xi.
Funding for this research provided in part by Sigma Xi Grants in Aid of Research Grant ID:. G2012162529 and a Graduate Field Research Award from The Tinker Foundation.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Croat TB (1978) Flora of Barro Colorado Island. Stanford University Press, Palo AltoGoogle Scholar
- Law R (1979) Ecological determinants in the evolution of life histories. In: Anderson RM, Turner BD, Taylor LR (eds) Population dynamics. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 81–103Google Scholar
- R Core Team (2014) R: a language and environment for statistical computing R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, AustriaGoogle Scholar
- Roff DA (2002) Life history evolution. Sinauer Associates, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
- Stearns SC (1992) The evolution of life histories. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Stearns SC, Crandall RE (1984) Plasticity for age and size at sexual maturity: a life-history response to unavoidable stress. In: Potts GW, Wooton RJ (eds) Fish reproduction: strategies and tactics. Academic Press, London, pp 13–33Google Scholar
- Wesselingh RA, Klinkhamer PG, de Jong TJ, Boorman LA (1997) Threshold size for flowering in different habitats: effects of size-dependent growth and survival. Ecology 78:2118–2132Google Scholar