↓ Skip to main content

The relative importance of reproduction and survival for the conservation of two dolphin populations

Overview of attention for article published in Ecology and Evolution, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
13 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages
wikipedia
7 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
82 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
179 Mendeley
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
The relative importance of reproduction and survival for the conservation of two dolphin populations
Published in
Ecology and Evolution, April 2016
DOI 10.1002/ece3.2130
Pubmed ID
Authors

Oliver Manlik, Jane A. McDonald, Janet Mann, Holly C. Raudino, Lars Bejder, Michael Krützen, Richard C. Connor, Michael R. Heithaus, Robert C. Lacy, William B. Sherwin

Abstract

It has been proposed that in slow-growing vertebrate populations survival generally has a greater influence on population growth than reproduction. Despite many studies cautioning against such generalizations for conservation, wildlife management for slow-growing populations still often focuses on perturbing survival without careful evaluation as to whether those changes are likely or feasible. Here, we evaluate the relative importance of reproduction and survival for the conservation of two bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops cf aduncus) populations: a large, apparently stable population and a smaller one that is forecast to decline. We also assessed the feasibility and effectiveness of wildlife management objectives aimed at boosting either reproduction or survival. Consistent with other analytically based elasticity studies, survival had the greatest effect on population trajectories when altering vital rates by equal proportions. However, the findings of our alternative analytical approaches are in stark contrast to commonly used proportional sensitivity analyses and suggest that reproduction is considerably more important. We show that in the stable population reproductive output is higher, and adult survival is lower;the difference in viability between the two populations is due to the difference in reproduction;reproductive rates are variable, whereas survival rates are relatively constant over time;perturbations on the basis of observed, temporal variation indicate that population dynamics are much more influenced by reproduction than by adult survival;for the apparently declining population, raising reproductive rates would be an effective and feasible tool to reverse the forecast population decline; increasing survival would be ineffective. Our findings highlight the importance of reproduction - even in slow-growing populations - and the need to assess the effect of natural variation in vital rates on population viability. We echo others in cautioning against generalizations based on life-history traits and recommend that population modeling for conservation should also take into account the magnitude of vital rate changes that could be attained under alternative management scenarios.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 179 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
South Africa 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 177 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 16%
Researcher 28 16%
Student > Master 27 15%
Student > Bachelor 26 15%
Other 9 5%
Other 25 14%
Unknown 36 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 88 49%
Environmental Science 34 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 3%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 1%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 <1%
Other 2 1%
Unknown 46 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 29 January 2021.
All research outputs
#1,477,338
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from Ecology and Evolution
#730
of 8,583 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,237
of 313,920 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ecology and Evolution
#10
of 132 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,583 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
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 313,920 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 132 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.