Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
Thehttps:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

NIH NLM Logo
Log inShow account info
Access keysNCBI HomepageMyNCBI HomepageMain ContentMain Navigation
pubmed logo
Advanced Clipboard
User Guide

Full text links

Atypon full text link Atypon Free PMC article
Full text links

Actions

.2009 Jan 6;106(1):192-6.
doi: 10.1073/pnas.0806105106. Epub 2008 Dec 24.

Great ranging associated with greater reproductive investment in mammals

Affiliations

Great ranging associated with greater reproductive investment in mammals

Herman Pontzer et al. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A..

Abstract

Most animals must travel to find food, incurring an unavoidable energy and time cost. Economic theory predicts, and experimental work confirms, that within species, increasing the distance traveled each day to find food has negative fitness consequences, decreasing the amount of energy invested in maintenance, repair, and reproduction. Here, we show that this relationship between daily distance traveled and reproductive success is fundamentally different between species and over evolutionary time in many lineages. Phylogenetically controlled analyses of 161 eutherian mammals indicate that, after controlling for body mass, evolutionary increases in the daily distance traveled are associated with corresponding increases in both total fertility (number of offspring per lifetime) and total offspring mass (grams of offspring per lifetime). This suggests that over evolutionary time, increasing travel distance is often part of a strategy for procuring more food energy and not necessarily a response to decreased food availability. These results have important implications for ecological comparisons among species, including assessments of habitat quality based on locomotor behavior.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
Hypothetical energy budgets for a 100 g mammal (see ref. 24), showing proposed differences in travel costs versus net intake,Enet, over different time scales. (A) Within species, decreasing the ratio of food gained per meter,B, to travel cost per meter,C, from 8:1 to 3:1 increases daily travel distance and cost by 3.3× (right arrow), but limited maximum intake results in decreasedEnet. (B) In contrast, with an evolutionary increase in maximum intake (down arrow) increasing daily travel 4× results in greaterEnet even with the lower ratioB:C. Note that changesB:C do not dictate evolutionary changes in ranging and maximum intake in this model; see text for discussion.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.
Estimated food energy acquired per meter,B (J/m), versus the energy cost of travel per meter,C (J/m), for 161 mammal species.B is calculated by dividing estimated daily energy expenditure (kJ/day, equation 1 in ref. 24) by daily movement distance,D (km/day, Appendix 1).C was estimated from body mass using published allometric equations (156 terrestrial species, ref. ; 5 aquatic species, ref. 51). Filled symbols: species for which direct measures of daily energy expenditure (circles) or both daily energy expenditure and cost of travel (squares) are available. AsC increases with body size (42), the ratio ofB:C changes with body size, from a mean of 65:1 for a 1 kg animal to 13:1 for a 800 kg animal. Dashed line indicatesB =C. Note thatC in this figure, also termed the “incremental cost of locomotion” (2) does not include the “postural cost” of travel (52).
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.
Studentized residual phylogenetic contrasts, corrected for body mass, of daily movement distances versus (A) total fertility and (B) total offspring mass for 113 and 111 mammalian species, respectively. Dashed line indicates the Reduced Major Axis trendline. While some evolutionary changes in daily movement distance are negatively correlated with changes in reproduction (blue quadrants), in most instances, daily movement distance is positively associated with reproductive output (yellow quadrants). In contrast, within species, daily movement distance is negatively correlated with reproductive and somatic investment (see text).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Clutton-Brock TH, Harvey PH. Primate ecology and social organization. J Zoo Lond. 1977;183:1–39.
    1. Garland T. Scaling the ecological cost of transport to body mass in terrestrial mammals. Am Nat. 1983;121:571–587.
    1. Wrangham RW, Gittleman JL, Chapman CA. Constraints on group size in primates and carnivores, population density and day-range assays of exploitation competition. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 1993;32:199–209.
    1. Janson CH, Goldsmith ML. Predicting group size in primates, foraging costs and predation risks. Behav Ecol. 1995;6:326–336.
    1. Chapman CA, Chapman LJ. Determinants of group size in primates: The importance of travel costs. In: Boinski S, Garber PA, editors. On the Move. Chicago: Univ of Chicago; 2000. pp. 24–42.

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources

Full text links
Atypon full text link Atypon Free PMC article
Cite
Send To

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSHPMCBookshelfDisclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.


[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2026 Movatter.jp