Display options
Cite
Lagrange P, Gimenez O, Doligez B, et al. Assessment of individual and conspecific reproductive success as determinants of breeding dispersal of female tree swallows: A capture-recapture approach. Ecol Evol. 2017;7(18):7334-7346doi: 10.1002/ece3.3241.
Lagrange, P., Gimenez, O., Doligez, B., Pradel, R., Garant, D., Pelletier, F., & Bélisle, M. (2017). Assessment of individual and conspecific reproductive success as determinants of breeding dispersal of female tree swallows: A capture-recapture approach. Ecology and evolution, 7(18), 7334-7346. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3241
Lagrange, Paméla, et al. "Assessment of individual and conspecific reproductive success as determinants of breeding dispersal of female tree swallows: A capture-recapture approach." Ecology and evolution vol. 7,18 (2017): 7334-7346. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3241
Lagrange P, Gimenez O, Doligez B, Pradel R, Garant D, Pelletier F, Bélisle M. Assessment of individual and conspecific reproductive success as determinants of breeding dispersal of female tree swallows: A capture-recapture approach. Ecol Evol. 2017 Aug 09;7(18):7334-7346. doi: 10.1002/ece3.3241. eCollection 2017 Sep. PMID: 28944020; PMCID: PMC5606858.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Ecol Evol. 2017 Aug 09;7(18):7334-7346. doi: 10.1002/ece3.3241. eCollection 2017 Sep.

Assessment of individual and conspecific reproductive success as determinants of breeding dispersal of female tree swallows: A capture-recapture approach.

Ecology and evolution

Paméla Lagrange, Olivier Gimenez, Blandine Doligez, Roger Pradel, Dany Garant, Fanie Pelletier, Marc Bélisle

Affiliations

  1. Département de Biologie Université de Sherbrooke Sherbrooke QC Canada.
  2. CEFE UMR 5175 CNRS - Université de Montpellier Université Paul-Valéry Montpellier - EPHE Montpellier Cedex 5 France.
  3. Laboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Evolutive - CNRS UMR 5558 Université de Lyon 1 Villeurbanne France.

PMID: 28944020 PMCID: PMC5606858 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.3241

Abstract

Breeding dispersal is a key process of population structure and dynamics and is often triggered by an individual's breeding failure. In both colonial and territorial birds, reproductive success of conspecifics (RSc) can also lead individuals to change breeding sites after a failure on a site. Yet, few studies have simultaneously investigated the independent contribution of individual reproductive success (RSi) and of RSc on dispersal decision. Here, we develop a modeling framework to disentangle the effects of RSi and RSc on demographic parameters, while accounting for imperfect individual detection and other confounding factors such as age or dispersal behavior in the previous year. Using a 10-year capture-recapture dataset composed of 1,595 banded tree swallows, we assessed the effects of nonmanipulated RSi and RSc on female breeding dispersal in this semicolonial passerine. Dispersal was strongly driven by RSi, but not by RSc. Unsuccessful females were 9.5-2.5 times more likely to disperse than successful ones, depending if they had dispersed or not in the previous year, respectively. Unsuccessful females were also three times less likely to be detected than successful ones. Contrary to theoretical and empirical studies, RSc did not drive the decision to disperse but influenced the selection of the following breeding site once dispersal had been initiated. Because detection of individuals was driven by RSi, which was positively correlated to RSc, assuming a perfect detection as in previous studies may have lead us to conclude that RSc affected dispersal patterns, yet our approach corrected for this bias. Overall, our results suggest that the value and use of RSc as public information to guide dispersal decisions are likely dictated by multiple ecological determinants, such as landscape structure and extent, if this cue is indeed used.

Keywords: capture–recapture data; dispersal; multievent model; reproductive success; social information; tree swallow

References

  1. Biol Lett. 2008 Oct 23;4(5):538-40 - PubMed
  2. Ecol Lett. 2009 Mar;12(3):197-209 - PubMed
  3. Ecology. 2014 Aug;95(8):2316-23 - PubMed
  4. Ecol Appl. 2011 Mar;21(2):555-64 - PubMed
  5. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2005 May;80(2):205-25 - PubMed
  6. Proc Biol Sci. 2008 Oct 7;275(1648):2257-63 - PubMed
  7. Science. 2004 Jul 23;305(5683):487-91 - PubMed
  8. Oecologia. 2005 Oct;145(4):650-7 - PubMed
  9. Am Nat. 2012 Jan;179(1):E15-27 - PubMed
  10. Anim Behav. 1999 Mar;57(3):647-654 - PubMed
  11. Trends Ecol Evol. 2005 Apr;20(4):187-93 - PubMed
  12. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2010 Dec 27;365(1560):4065-76 - PubMed
  13. Proc Biol Sci. 2003 Sep 7;270(1526):1809-13 - PubMed
  14. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2012 May;87(2):290-312 - PubMed
  15. Ecology. 2007 Sep;88(9):2373-82 - PubMed
  16. Am Nat. 2008 Sep;172(3):441-8 - PubMed
  17. Ecol Appl. 2008 Jul;18(5):1140-54 - PubMed
  18. Proc Biol Sci. 2006 Feb 7;273(1584):349-55 - PubMed
  19. Science. 2002 Aug 16;297(5584):1168-70 - PubMed
  20. Biometrics. 2005 Jun;61(2):442-7 - PubMed
  21. Oecologia. 2008 Feb;155(1):33-41 - PubMed
  22. J Anim Ecol. 2009 May;78(3):625-35 - PubMed
  23. Ecol Evol. 2017 Aug 09;7(18):7334-7346 - PubMed
  24. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2011 Apr 12;366(1567):949-57 - PubMed
  25. J Anim Ecol. 2011 Nov;80(6):1227-35 - PubMed

Publication Types