IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/thpobi/v82y2012i4p317-328.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modeling reproductive trajectories of roe deer females: Fixed or dynamic heterogeneity?

Author

Listed:
  • Plard, F.
  • Bonenfant, C.
  • Delorme, D.
  • Gaillard, J.M.

Abstract

The relative role of dynamic and fixed heterogeneity in shaping the individual heterogeneity observed in most life-history traits remains difficult to quantify. In a recent work, Tuljapurkar et al. (2009) suggested modeling individual heterogeneity in lifetime reproductive success by a null model building reproductive trajectories from a first-order Markov chain. According to this model, among-individual differences in reproductive trajectories would be generated by the stochastic transitions among reproductive states (such as breeder and non-breeder) due to dynamic heterogeneity. In this work, we analyze the individual variation in three reproductive metrics (reproductive status, fecundity, and reproductive success) in two populations of roe deer intensively monitored using Tuljapurkar et al. (2009)’s dynamic model. Moreover, we challenge the Tuljapurkar model previously used as a biological null model to test whether the observed distribution of reproductive success over the lifetime was generated by a stochastic process by modifying two steps of the previous model to build a full stochastic model. We show that a distribution generated by the full dynamic model proposed by Tuljapurkar et al. (2009) can be consistently interpreted as only generated from a stochastic biological process provided that the probabilities of transition among reproductive states used are independent of the current reproductive state and that the positive co-variation that usually occurs between survival and reproduction among individuals is removed. Only the reproductive status of roe deer females could be restricted to a stochastic process described by the full stochastic model, probably because most females (>90%) were breeders in a given year. The fecundity of roe deer females could not be adequately described by the full dynamic and full stochastic model, and the observed distribution of female reproductive success differed from the one generated by a full dynamic model in which each individual reproductive trajectory was independent of the individual lifespan (second step of the full dynamic model changed). While there was clear evidence that dynamic heterogeneity occurred and accounted for a large part of the observed among-individual variation in reproductive trajectories of roe deer females, a stochastic process did not provide a suitable model for all reproductive metrics. Consequently, models including additional fixed and dynamic traits need to be built in order to separate the relative role of fixed and dynamic heterogeneities in generating reproductive trajectories.

Suggested Citation

  • Plard, F. & Bonenfant, C. & Delorme, D. & Gaillard, J.M., 2012. "Modeling reproductive trajectories of roe deer females: Fixed or dynamic heterogeneity?," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 82(4), pages 317-328.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:thpobi:v:82:y:2012:i:4:p:317-328
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tpb.2012.03.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040580912000457
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tpb.2012.03.006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James Vaupel & Kenneth Manton & Eric Stallard, 1979. "The impact of heterogeneity in individual frailty on the dynamics of mortality," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 16(3), pages 439-454, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Stefano Giaimo & Xiang-Yi Li & Arne Traulsen & Annette Baudisch, 2018. "Evolution of fixed demographic heterogeneity from a game of stable coexistence," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 38(8), pages 197-226.
    2. Coste, Christophe F.D. & Austerlitz, Frédéric & Pavard, Samuel, 2017. "Trait level analysis of multitrait population projection matrices," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 47-58.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bagdonavicius, Vilijandas & Nikulin, Mikhail, 2000. "On goodness-of-fit for the linear transformation and frailty models," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 177-188, April.
    2. Yahia Salhi & Pierre-Emmanuel Thérond, 2016. "Age-Specific Adjustment of Graduated Mortality," Working Papers hal-01391285, HAL.
    3. Feehan, Dennis & Wrigley-Field, Elizabeth, 2020. "How do populations aggregate?," SocArXiv 2fkw3, Center for Open Science.
    4. M. K. Lintu & Asha Kamath, 2022. "Performance of recurrent event models on defect proneness data," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 315(2), pages 2209-2218, August.
    5. Il Do Ha & Maengseok Noh & Youngjo Lee, 2010. "Bias Reduction of Likelihood Estimators in Semiparametric Frailty Models," Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, Danish Society for Theoretical Statistics;Finnish Statistical Society;Norwegian Statistical Association;Swedish Statistical Association, vol. 37(2), pages 307-320, June.
    6. Andreas Wienke & Anne M. Herskind & Kaare Christensen & Axel Skytthe & Anatoli I. Yashin, 2002. "The influence of smoking and BMI on heritability in susceptibility to coronary heart disease," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2002-003, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    7. Svetlana V. Ukraintseva & Anatoli I. Yashin, 2005. "Economic progress as cancer risk factor. I: Puzzling facts of cancer epidemiology," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2005-021, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    8. Silke van Daalen & Hal Caswell, 2015. "Lifetime reproduction and the second demographic transition: Stochasticity and individual variation," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 33(20), pages 561-588.
    9. K. Motarjem & M. Mohammadzadeh & A. Abyar, 2020. "Geostatistical survival model with Gaussian random effect," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 61(1), pages 85-107, February.
    10. Schultz, T. Paul, 2010. "Population and Health Policies," Handbook of Development Economics, in: Dani Rodrik & Mark Rosenzweig (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 4785-4881, Elsevier.
    11. Xu, Linzhi & Zhang, Jiajia, 2010. "An EM-like algorithm for the semiparametric accelerated failure time gamma frailty model," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 54(6), pages 1467-1474, June.
    12. Carlos Díaz-Venegas, 2014. "Identifying the Confounders of Marginalization and Mortality in Mexico, 2003–2007," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 118(2), pages 851-875, September.
    13. Väinö Kannisto, 2000. "Measuring the compression of mortality," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 3(6).
    14. Jaap H. Abbring & Tim Salimans, 2019. "The Likelihood of Mixed Hitting Times," Papers 1905.03463, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2021.
    15. Annamaria Olivieri & Ermanno Pitacco, 2016. "Frailty and Risk Classification for Life Annuity Portfolios," Risks, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-23, October.
    16. James W. Vaupel, 2002. "Post-Darwinian longevity," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2002-043, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    17. Maxim S. Finkelstein, 2005. "Shocks in homogeneous and heterogeneous populations," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2005-024, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    18. Philip Verwimp & Davide Osti & Gudrun Østby, 2020. "Forced Displacement, Migration, and Fertility in Burundi," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 46(2), pages 287-319, June.
    19. Luping Zhao & Timothy E. Hanson, 2011. "Spatially Dependent Polya Tree Modeling for Survival Data," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 67(2), pages 391-403, June.
    20. repec:wyi:journl:002122 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Yeo, Keng Leong & Valdez, Emiliano A., 2006. "Claim dependence with common effects in credibility models," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 609-629, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:thpobi:v:82:y:2012:i:4:p:317-328. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/intelligence .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.