Is parental competitive ability in winter negatively affected by previous springs' family size?

Increased allocation to reproduction reduces future competitive ability in a burying beetle

The existence of a trade-off between current and future reproduction is a fundamental prediction of life history theory. Support for this prediction comes from brood size manipulations, showing that caring for enlarged broods often reduces the parent's future survival or fecundity. However, in many species, individuals must invest in competing for the resources required for future reproduction. Thus, a neglected aspect of this trade-off is that increased allocation to current reproduction may reduce an individual's future competitive ability. We tested this prediction in the burying beetle, Nicrophorus vespilloides, a species where parents care for their offspring and where there is fierce competition for resources used for breeding. We manipulated reproductive effort by providing females with either a small brood of 10 larvae or a large brood of 40 larvae and compared the ability of these females, and virgin females that had no prior access to a carcass, to compete for a second carcass against a virgin competitor. We found that increased allocation to current reproduction reduced future competitive ability, as females that had cared for a small brood were more successful when competing for a second carcass against a virgin competitor than females that had cared for a large brood. In addition, the costs of reproduction were offset by the benefits of feeding from the carcass during an initial breeding attempt, as females that had cared for a small brood were better competitors than virgin females that had no prior access to a carcass, whilst females that had cared for a large brood were similar in competitive ability to virgin females. Our results add to our understanding of the trade-off between current and future reproduction by showing that this trade-off can manifest through differences in future competitive ability and that direct benefits of reproduction can offset some of these costs.

Reproductive effort and future parental competitive ability: A nest box removal experiment

The life history trade-off between current and future reproduction is a theoretically well-established concept. However, empirical evidence for the occurrence of a fitness cost of reproduction is mixed. Evidence indicates that parents only pay a cost of reproduction when local competition is high. In line with this, recent experimental work on a small passerine bird, the Great tit (Parus major) showed that reproductive effort negatively affected the competitive ability of parents, estimated through competition for high quality breeding sites in spring. In the current study, we further investigate the negative causal relationship between reproductive effort and future parental competitive ability, with the aim to quantify the consequences for parental fitness, when breeding sites are scarce. To this end, we (a) manipulated the family size of Great tit parents and (b) induced severe competition for nest boxes among the parents just before the following breeding season by means of a large-scale nest box removal experiment. Parents increased their feeding effort in response to our family size manipulation and we successfully induced competition among the parents the following spring. Against our expectation, we found no effect of last season's family size on the ability of parents to secure a scarce nest box for breeding. In previous years, if detected, the survival cost of reproduction was always paid after midwinter. In this year, parents did pay a survival cost of reproduction before midwinter and thus before the onset of the experiment in early spring. Winter food availability during our study year was exceptionally low, and thus, competition in early winter may have been extraordinarily high. We hypothesize that differences in parental competitive ability due to their previous reproductive effort might have played a role, but before the onset of our experiment and resulted in the payment of the survival cost of reproduction.

Is parental competitive ability in winter negatively affected by previous springs' family size?

Reproductive behavior cannot be understood without taking the local level of competition into account. Experimental work in great tits (Parus major) showed that (1) a survival cost of reproduction was paid in environments with high levels of competition during the winter period and (2) experimentally manipulated family size negatively affected the ability of parents to compete for preferred breeding boxes in the next spring. The fact that survival was affected in winter suggests that the competitive ability of parents in winter may also be affected by previous reproductive effort. In this study, we aim to investigate whether (1) such carryover effects of family size on the ability of parents to compete for resources in the winter period occurred and (2) this could explain the occurrence of a survival cost of reproduction under increased competition. During two study years, we manipulated the size of in total 168 great tit broods. Next, in winter, we induced competition among the parents by drastically reducing the availability of roosting boxes in their local environment for one week. Contrary to our expectation, we found no negative effect of family size manipulation on the probability of parents to obtain a roosting box. In line with previous work, we did find that a survival cost of reproduction was paid only in plots in which competition for roosting boxes was shortly increased. Our findings thus add to the scarce experimental evidence that survival cost of reproduction are paid under higher levels of local competition but this could not be linked to a reduced competitive ability of parents in winter.