Modeling heterothermic fitness landscapes in a marsupial hibernator using changes in body composition

Hibernation is an adaptive strategy that allows animals to enter a hypometabolic state, conserving energy and enhancing their fitness by surviving harsh environmental conditions. However, addressing the adaptive value of hibernation, at the individual level and in natural populations, has been challenging. Here, we applied a non-invasive technique, body composition analysis by quantitative magnetic resonance (qMR), to calculate energy savings by hibernation in a population of hibernating marsupials (Dromiciops gliroides). Using outdoor enclosures installed in a temperate rainforest, and measuring qMR periodically, we determined the amount of fat and lean mass consumed during a whole hibernation cycle. With this information, we estimated the daily energy expenditure of hibernation (DEEH) at the individual level and related to previous fat accumulation. Using model selection approaches and phenotypic selection analysis, we calculated linear (directional, β), quadratic (stabilizing or disruptive, γ) and correlational (ρ) coefficients for DEEH and fat accumulation. We found significant, negative directional selection for DEEH (βDEEH = - 0.58 ± 0.09), a positive value for fat accumulation (βFAT = 0.34 ± 0.07), and positive correlational selection between both traits (ρDEEH × FAT = 0.24 ± 0.07). Then, individuals maximizing previous fat accumulation and minimizing DEEH were promoted by selection, which is visualized by a bi-variate selection surface estimated by generalized additive models. At the comparative level, results fall within the isometric allometry known for hibernation metabolic rate in mammals. Thus, by a combination of a non-invasive technique for body composition analysis and semi-natural enclosures, we were characterized the heterothermic fitness landscape in a semi-natural population of hibernators.

Isometric scaling of faunal patchiness: Seagrass macrobenthic abundance across small spatial scales

Following earlier studies across 2115 → 33 m² scales (Barnes and Laurie, 2018), patchiness of macrobenthic abundance in intertidal Queensland seagrass was assessed by dispersion indices, spatial autocorrelation and hotspot analysis across a hierarchically-nested series of smaller scales (5.75 → 0.09 m²). Overall patterns of distribution and abundance over larger extents and with greater lag were mirrored across these smaller ones. Assemblage abundance per station varied by a factor of >10, but all three approaches showed effective constancy of total assemblage patchiness across all sub-2115 m² scales (across-scales-mean Lloyd's I_P of 1.06 and global Moran's I of 0.13). Equivalent constancy was also shown by most numerically-dominant species (scaling exponent β = 0.93-1.15). Decreasing patchiness of some species with decreasing scale, however, resulted in two no longer being patchily dispersed across small scales. Significant hotspots of abundance occurred at a constant proportion of stations across scales, against a background of randomly scattered peak-abundance points.

Size matters: relationships between body size and body mass of common coastal, aquatic invertebrates in the Baltic Sea

Background

Organism biomass is one of the most important variables in ecological studies, making biomass estimations one of the most common laboratory tasks. Biomass of small macroinvertebrates is usually estimated as dry mass or ash-free dry mass (hereafter ‘DM’ vs. ‘AFDM’) per sample; a laborious and time consuming process, that often can be speeded up using easily measured and reliable proxy variables like body size or wet (fresh) mass. Another common way of estimating AFDM (one of the most accurate but also time-consuming estimates of biologically active tissue mass) is the use of AFDM/DM ratios as conversion factors. So far, however, these ratios typically ignore the possibility that the relative mass of biologically active vs. non-active support tissue (e.g., protective exoskeleton or shell)—and therefore, also AFDM/DM ratios—may change with body size, as previously shown for taxa like spiders, vertebrates and trees.

Methods

We collected aquatic, epibenthic macroinvertebrates (>1 mm) in 32 shallow bays along a 360 km stretch of the Swedish coast along the Baltic Sea; one of the largest brackish water bodies on Earth. We then estimated statistical relationships between the body size (length or height in mm), body dry mass and ash-free dry mass for 14 of the most common taxa; five gastropods, three bivalves, three crustaceans and three insect larvae. Finally, we statistically estimated the potential influence of body size on the AFDM/DM ratio per taxon.

Results

For most taxa, non-linear regression models describing the power relationship between body size and (i) DM and (ii) AFDM fit the data well (as indicated by low SE and high R²). Moreover, for more than half of the taxa studied (including the vast majority of the shelled molluscs), body size had a negative influence on organism AFDM/DM ratios.

Discussion

The good fit of the modelled power relationships suggests that the constants reported here can be used to quickly estimate organism dry- and ash-free dry mass based on body size, thereby freeing up considerable work resources. However, the considerable differences in constants between taxa emphasize the need for taxon-specific relationships, and the potential dangers associated with ignoring body size. The negative influence of body size on the AFDM/DM ratio found in a majority of the molluscs could be caused by increasingly thicker shells with organism age, and/or spawning-induced loss of biologically active tissue in adults. Consequently, future studies utilizing AFDM/DM (and presumably also AFDM/wet mass) ratios should carefully assess the potential influence of body size to ensure more reliable estimates of organism body mass.