figshare
Browse
rsos180453_si_002.docx (12.47 kB)

Proof that mass-abundance curves have the same shapes as fitness contours from The shark–tuna dichotomy: why tuna lay tiny eggs but sharks produce large offspring

Download (12.47 kB)
journal contribution
posted on 2018-07-21, 13:46 authored by Richard M. Sibly, Astrid Kodric-Brown, Susan M. Luna, James H. Brown
Teleosts such as tunas and billfish lay millions of tiny eggs weighing on the order of 0.001 g, whereas chondrichthyes such as sharks and rays produce a few eggs or live offspring weighing about 2% of adult body mass, as much as 10 000 g in some species. Why are the strategies so extreme, and why are intermediate ones absent? Building on previous work, we show quantitatively how offspring size reflects the relationship between growth and death rates. We construct fitness contours as functions of offspring size and number, and show how these can be derived from juvenile growth and survivorship curves. Convex contours, corresponding to Pearl Type 1 and 2 survivorship curves, select for extremes, either miniscule or large offspring; concave contours select for offspring of intermediate size. Of particular interest are what we call critical straight-line fitness contours, corresponding to log-linear Pearl Type 3 survivorship curves, which separate regimes that select for opposite optimal offspring sizes.

History

Usage metrics

    Royal Society Open Science

    Licence

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC