Reproductive timing and individual fitness

By J. Brommer, J. Merilä, Hanna Kokko. 2002

150 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Genetics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8d43d357c83abc8b376a3d58035099126129c494

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

1. Hanna Kokko
2. R. Brooks
3. B. Hatchwell
4. Michael D. Jennions
5. A. MacColl
6. A. Hendry
7. O. Krüger
8. L. Kruuk

In Genetics

1. Hanna Kokko
2. A. Hendry
3. R. Brooks
4. O. Krüger
5. L. Kruuk
6. Andrew M Stoehr
7. Michael D. Jennions
8. B. Hatchwell

Citations in the corpus

• The Contemporary Evolution of Fitness (2018, background): “…structure and overlapping generations can require metrics of fitness that consider the timing of reproduction, as well as multiple aspects of population dynamics and environmental fluctuations, and resulting population density (Brommer 2000, Brommer et al. 2002, Moorad 2014, Sæther & Engen 2015).”
• The evolution of mate choice and mating biases (2003, background): “Unfortunately, this is an inadequate measure because it fails to take into consideration offspring breeding value (Brommer et al. 2002).”
• Determinants of lifetime fitness in a cooperative breeder, the long‐tailed tit Aegithalos caudatus (2004, background): “It is not clear from our results whether either LRS or individual fitness is useful as a predictor of subsequent spread of an individual’s genes through a population (Brommer et al. 2002).”
• Sexual dimorphism in immunocompetence: what does life-history theory predict? (2006, background): “Although the proper choice of a fitness measure depends on the type of density dependence that operates in a population (Mylius and Diekmann 1995; Brommer et al. 2002), a different fitness measure is unlikely to change our conclusions (see Discussion), nor is the fact that male and female fitness mu”
• Estimating genetic parameters in natural populations using the "animal model". (2004, background): “…effects may ultimately provide better estimates of an individual’s genetic contribution to future generations, and hence of selection on different phenotypic traits (see discussion in Grafen 1988; Charlesworth 1994; van Tienderen 2000; Wolf & Wade 2001; Brommer et al. 2002; Coulson et al. 2004).”
• Age at first breeding and fitness in goshawk Accipiter gentilis (2005, result): “This effect was not related to the fitness estimate used, LRS or λind, which has traditionally been invoked to explain conflicting results (McGraw & Caswell 1996; Brommer et al. 2002; Oli et al. 2002).”