↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating the demographic buffering hypothesis with vital rates estimated for Weddell seals from 30 years of mark–recapture data

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Animal Ecology, September 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
159 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evaluating the demographic buffering hypothesis with vital rates estimated for Weddell seals from 30 years of mark–recapture data
Published in
Journal of Animal Ecology, September 2011
DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2011.01902.x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jay J. Rotella, William A. Link, Thierry Chambert, Glenn E. Stauffer, Robert A. Garrott

Abstract

1. Life-history theory predicts that those vital rates that make larger contributions to population growth rate ought to be more strongly buffered against environmental variability than are those that are less important. Despite the importance of the theory for predicting demographic responses to changes in the environment, it is not yet known how pervasive demographic buffering is in animal populations because the validity of most existing studies has been called into question because of methodological deficiencies. 2. We tested for demographic buffering in the southern-most breeding mammal population in the world using data collected from 5558 known-age female Weddell seals over 30 years. We first estimated all vital rates simultaneously with mark-recapture analysis and then estimated process variance and covariance in those rates using a hierarchical Bayesian approach. We next calculated the population growth rate's sensitivity to changes in each of the vital rates and tested for evidence of demographic buffering by comparing properly scaled values of sensitivity and process variance in vital rates. 3. We found evidence of positive process covariance between vital rates, which indicates that all vital rates are affected in the same direction by changes in annual environment. Despite the positive correlations, we found strong evidence that demographic buffering occurred through reductions in variation in the vital rates to which population growth rate was most sensitive. Process variation in vital rates was inversely related to sensitivity measures such that variation was greatest in breeding probabilities, intermediate for survival rates of young animals and lowest for survival rates of older animals. 4. Our work contributes to a small but growing set of studies that have used rigorous methods on long-term, detailed data to investigate demographic responses to environmental variation. The information from these studies improves our understanding of life-history evolution in stochastic environments and provides useful information for predicting population responses to future environmental change. Our results for an Antarctic apex predator also provide useful baselines from a marine ecosystem when its top- and middle-trophic levels were not substantially impacted by human activity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 159 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 3 2%
Norway 2 1%
United States 2 1%
Canada 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Unknown 148 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 45 28%
Student > Master 22 14%
Other 22 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 14%
Student > Bachelor 10 6%
Other 21 13%
Unknown 17 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 96 60%
Environmental Science 29 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 1%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 <1%
Other 5 3%
Unknown 23 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 December 2011.
All research outputs
#6,810,797
of 24,712,008 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Animal Ecology
#1,724
of 3,166 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,843
of 134,633 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Animal Ecology
#10
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,712,008 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,166 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.4. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 134,633 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.