1. Bio432 Topic(s) for 2nd paper: Mating system evolutionary ecology Kin selection Non-kin cooperation Cultural evolution See references on course webpage

2. Behavior  Population Dynamics Behavior Directly Affects Population Dynamics Indirectly Affects Extinction Risk

3. Behavior  Population Dynamics Intensity of Sexual Selection Behavior & Morphology Advance Mating Also Impose Mortality Costs Increase Extinction Risk (?)

4. Behavior  Population Dynamics Sexually Selected Behavior/Morphology Mortality Costs: Increased Predation Greater Aggressive Injury Greater Parasite Load Testosterone, Immunity Greater Population Sensitivity to Demographic Stochasticity (?)

5. Behavior  Population Dynamics Sexually selected traits impose survival costs Birds: assumed dichotomy Dichromatic/Monochromatic spp  Strong/weak sexual selection Dichromatic: Males bright; Females dull

6. Behavior  Population Dynamics Given hypothesis, predict extinction rates higher dichromatic populations/species Suggestion: species introduced Pacific islands dichromatic spp more likely to go extinct than monochromatic spp

7. Behavior  Population Dynamics Predict spp with elaborate secondary sexual traits would occur in taxa with low species richness Extinctions due to sexual selection erode number of species

8. Behavior  Population Dynamics Birds: Opposite result Dichromatism correlates positively with species number with species number Sexual selection, thru mating preferences, promotes speciation in birds Need ecological, not evolutionary, test

9. Behavior  Population Dynamics Doherty et al. 2003. PNAS 100:5858. North American BBS Continent wide, 40 km transects,50 stops 21 consecutive years 185 monochromatic spp, 153 dichromatic spp

10. Behavior  Population Dynamics Estimated Extinction Rates Spp lost time t to time (t + 1)/Spp at time t Estimated Turnover Rates New spp at time (t + 1)/Spp at time (t + 1)

11. Behavior  Population Dynamics Comparisons: differences in each route, averaged over time (spatial effect) > 4000 observations

12. Extinction rate differences Dichromatic spp: 23% higher local rate.079 vs.064 per year Rate diff (di – mono) =.015 .002 > 0 Significant difference

13. Turnover rate differences Dichromatic spp: 25 % higher local rate.076 vs.061 per year Significant difference

14. Behavior  Population Dynamics Avian sexual dichromatism linked to sexual selection Greater predation, parasitism, rep. skew Higher rates local extinction (as predicted) but higher rates of colonization

15. Behavior  Population Dynamics Mating systems and conservation of exploited marine fish Worldwide decline commercial fisheries 20 th Century: 50 spp too rare for economic viability N Atlantic sharks declined 75% since 1986 Atlantic cod declined 90% last 35 years

16. Behavior  Population Dynamics Fishery management: “ecological” Temporal abundance Age/size distribution Geographic distribution Adequate stocks large; assumed that if stock collapses, recovery from reducedfishing Assumption failed

17. Behavior  Population Dynamics Rowe & Jennings. 2003. TREE 18:567. Collapsed population: need understand behavior Mating system, impact of fishing on mating

18. Behavior  Population Dynamics Not all individuals equally susceptible to effort Fishing targets largest, most active in population Alter phenotype distribution If heritable, selection pressure Can alter operational sex ratio, if one sex more likely to be caught

19. Behavior  Population Dynamics Fishery: focus on breeding aggregations Loss of males can reduce fertilization of ova Satellite male systems Territorial male systems Disruption of dominance relationships Aggression among males can delay female mate choice, egg release (viability cost)

20. Behavior  Population Dynamics Density-dependent reproduction Assumed logistic-like: maximal at minimal density Search for mates may produce Allee effect, depensation

21. Behavior  Population Dynamics