Evolutionary responses to harvesting in ungulates.

1. We investigate the evolutionary responses to harvesting in ungulates using a state-dependent, stochastic, density-dependent individual-based model of red deer Cervus elaphus (L.) females subject to different harvesting regimes. 2. The population's mean weight at first reproduction shifts towards light weights as harvesting increases, and its distribution changes from a single peak distribution under very low or high harvest rates, to a bimodal distribution under intermediate harvest rates. 3. These results suggest that, consistent with previous studies on aquatic species, harvesting-induced mortality may drive adaptive responses in ungulates by reducing the fitness benefits from adult survival and growth in favour of early and lightweight reproduction. 4. Selective harvesting for heavy animals has no additional effect on the evolutionarily stable strategy, suggesting that harvest rate is more important than the degree of selectivity in driving adaptive responses. However, selective harvesting of light females is positively associated with maturation weights even higher than those of a nonharvested population, probably due to the reduction in the fitness value of the offspring. 5. The average number of weight at maturation strategies in the population declines but the total number of strategies across all simulations increases with harvest rate, suggesting that harvesting-induced selection on weight at maturity overcomes the increase in strategy diversity expected from density-dependent release. 6. Yield initially increases with harvesting due to enhanced productivity of light females experiencing density-dependent release. However, it crashes under intense harvesting resulting in a population skewed to light, young and, therefore, less reproductive animals.

[1]  S. Stearns,et al.  The Evolution of Life Histories , 1992 .

[2]  J. Goszczyński,et al.  Physical condition of red deer in a high density population , 1996 .

[3]  H. Caswell.  Matrix population models : construction, analysis, and interpretation , 2001 .

[4]  S. Buskirk,et al.  Population History, Genetic Variability, and Horn Growth in Bighorn Sheep , 1995 .

[5]  Anne Loison,et al.  Consequences of harvesting on age structure, sex ratio and population dynamics of red deer Cervus elaphus in central Norway , 1999, Wildlife Biology.

[6]  J. Hutchings.  Life history consequences of overexploitation to population recovery in Northwest Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) , 2005 .

[7]  K. Stergiou,et al.  Comparative fixed gear studies in the Cyclades (Aegean Sea): size selectivity of small-hook longlines and monofilament gill nets , 2002 .

[8]  W. Getz,et al.  Population dynamics and harvesting of semelparous species with phenotypic and genotypic variability in reproductive age , 1995 .

[9]  J. Gaillard,et al.  Population dynamics of large herbivores: variable recruitment with constant adult survival. , 1998, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[10]  B. Sæther,et al.  Effects of Altering Sex Ratio Structure on the Demography of an Isolated Moose Population , 2003 .

[11]  T. Clutton‐Brock,et al.  Factors affecting reproduction in red deer (Cervus elaphus) hinds on Rhum. , 1978, Journal of reproduction and fertility.

[12]  B. Mitchell,et al.  Conception dates in relation to age and condition in two populations of Red deer in Scotland , 2009 .

[13]  B. Charlesworth,et al.  A test of evolutionary theories of senescence , 1980, Nature.

[14]  B. Sæther,et al.  Dynamics of a harvested moose population in a variable environment , 1999 .

[15]  M. Heino,et al.  Fisheries-Induced Selection Pressures in the Context of Sustainable Fisheries , 2002 .

[16]  J. Hutchings.  Collapse and recovery of marine fishes , 2000, Nature.

[17]  B. Johnson,et al.  Effects of Male Age and Female Nutritional Condition on Elk Reproduction , 2002 .

[18]  Penelope A. Hancock,et al.  An individual based model of bearded pig abundance , 2005 .

[19]  P. Holgate,et al.  Matrix Population Models. , 1990 .

[20]  Scott Ferson,et al.  Sensitivity analysis for models of population viability , 1995 .

[21]  T. Clutton‐Brock,et al.  Climatic Variation and Body Weight of Red Deer , 1983 .

[22]  S. Jennings,et al.  Life history correlates of responses to fisheries exploitation , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[23]  T. Clutton‐Brock,et al.  Sex differences and data quality as determinants of income from hunting red deer Cervus elaphus , 2004, Wildlife Biology.

[24]  A. Rosenberg,et al.  Population Dynamics of Exploited Fish Stocks at Low Population Levels , 1995, Science.

[25]  Andrew P. Hendry,et al.  Contemporary evolution meets conservation biology , 2003 .

[26]  D. Coltman,et al.  Undesirable evolutionary consequences of trophy hunting , 2003, Nature.

[27]  R. Morris,et al.  Reproductive performance of farmed red deer (Cervus elaphus) in New Zealand. IV. Biological markers as risk factors for yearling and adult hind conception. , 1999, Animal Reproduction Science.

[28]  H. Possingham,et al.  DO HARVEST REFUGES BUFFER KANGAROOS AGAINST EVOLUTIONARY RESPONSES TO SELECTIVE HARVESTING , 2004 .

[29]  W. E. Ricker,et al.  Changes in the Average Size and Average Age of Pacific Salmon , 1981 .

[30]  D. Tinkle,et al.  Natural selection and the evolution of reproductive effort. , 1975, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[31]  I. Boyd.  State-dependent fertility in pinnipeds: contrasting capital and income breeders , 2000 .

[32]  T. Clutton‐Brock,et al.  The demographic consequences of releasing a population of red deer from culling , 2004 .

[33]  L. Witting.  Evolutionary dynamics of exploited populations selected by density dependent competitive interactions , 2002 .

[34]  R. Morris,et al.  Reproductive performance of farmed red deer (Cervus elaphus) in New Zealand. I. Descriptive data. , 1999, Animal reproduction science.

[35]  Mikko Heino,et al.  Management of evolving fish stocks , 1998 .

[36]  D. Roff.  Evolutionary Quantitative Genetics , 1997, Springer US.

[37]  J. Connell.  Diversity in tropical rain forests and coral reefs. , 1978, Science.

[38]  L. Partridge,et al.  The Ecological Context of Life History Evolution , 1988, Science.

[39]  Josué Martínez-Garmendia.  Simulation analysis of evolutionary response of fish populations to size-selective harvesting with the use of an individual-based model , 1998 .

[40]  Simon Jennings,et al.  Structural change in an exploited fish community: a consequence of differential fishing effects on species with contrasting life histories , 1999 .

[41]  J. Hutchings.  Evolutionary biology: The cod that got away , 2004, Nature.

[42]  Tim Coulson,et al.  POPULATION SUBSTRUCTURE, LOCAL DENSITY, AND CALF WINTER SURVIVAL IN RED DEER (CERVUS ELAPHUS) , 1997 .

[43]  B. Mitchell,et al.  Annual cycles of body weight and condition in Scottish Red deer, Cervus elaphus , 2009 .

[44]  T. Clutton‐Brock,et al.  Reproductive Effort and Terminal Investment in Iteroparous Animals , 1984, The American Naturalist.

[45]  U. Dieckmann,et al.  Assessing changes in age and size at maturation in collapsing populations of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) , 2005 .

[46]  E. Milner‐Gulland,et al.  Sex‐Biased Harvesting and Population Dynamics in Ungulates: Implications for Conservation and Sustainable Use , 1994 .

[47]  E. Milner‐Gulland,et al.  The trade in babirusas and wild pigs in North Sulawesi, Indonesia , 2002 .

[48]  T. Clutton‐Brock,et al.  Climate, plant phenology and variation in age of first reproduction in a temperate herbivore , 1996 .

[49]  George C. Williams,et al.  Natural Selection, the Costs of Reproduction, and a Refinement of Lack's Principle , 1966, The American Naturalist.

[50]  L. Real,et al.  Life History Evolution in Stochastic Environments: A Graphical Mean‐Variance Approach , 1992 .

[51]  Richard Law,et al.  Fishing, selection, and phenotypic evolution , 2000 .

[52]  J. Lindström,et al.  Early development and fitness in birds and mammals. , 1999, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[53]  G. Bell.  The Costs of Reproduction and Their Consequences , 1980, The American Naturalist.

[54]  R. Lande,et al.  DEMOGRAPHIC AND EVOLUTIONARY RESPONSES TO SELECTIVE HARVESTING IN POPULATIONS WITH DISCRETE GENERATIONS , 2001 .

[55]  F. Allendorf,et al.  Genetic consequences of hunting: what do we know and what should we do? , 2002 .