Cohort variation, climate effects and population dynamics in a short-lived lizard
Appendix A – Climate variation
Temperature and rainfall show marked variations among cohorts (Figure A1). Only temperature during June showed a significant temporal increase (F1,15 = 16.94, p = 0.0009, + 0.29 °C ± 0.07 s.e. per year, see Figure A1). The temporal autocorrelation coefficients of the time series for temperature and rainfall were weak and non significant (p > 0.05). Furthermore, correlations of temperature and rainfall data between life stages within a given birth cohort were usually small (Table A1).
Figure A1. Climate conditions were calculatedfor each birth cohort at distinct life stages of the common lizard as defined in Figure 1. For the ease of visualization, we represent here only the data for mid-gestation and early juvenile stages. (A) Means of maximum daily temperatures; note the exceptionally warm summer for the cohort born in 2003 and the warming trend during mid-gestation. (B) Cumulative rainfall for birth cohorts from 1988 to 2004; note the large temporal variation in rainfallduring mid-gestation.
Table A1. Pairwise correlations oftemperature (TP) and rainfall (RF) databetween life stages within birth cohorts(upper triangular matrix: Pearson’s product moment correlation coefficient, lower triangular matrix: sample size). Significant correlations are bolded. Life stages are numbered according to notations defined in Figure 1: 1 = conception, 2 = mid-gestation, 3 = early juvenile, 4= late juvenile, 5 = sub adult and 6 = adult. Bolded correlations are significant without correction for multiple testing (p < 0.05).
TP1 / TP2 / TP3 / TP4 / TP5 / TP6 / RF1 / RF2 / RF3 / RF4 / RF5 / RF6TP1 / 0.153 / 0.377 / -0.042 / -0.258 / 0.327 / 0.015 / 0.065 / -0.293 / -0.194 / 0.052 / 0.290
TP2 / 16 / 0.354 / 0.458 / 0.462 / 0.181 / -0.270 / -0.636 / 0.114 / -0.376 / -0.380 / 0.207
TP3 / 16 / 16 / -0.075 / -0.204 / -0.273 / -0.279 / -0.075 / -0.480 / -0.092 / 0.085 / -0.156
TP4 / 15 / 15 / 15 / 0.679 / 0.176 / 0.302 / -0.108 / 0.404 / -0.315 / -0.667 / -0.240
TP5 / 14 / 14 / 14 / 14 / 0.337 / 0.085 / 0.197 / 0.464 / -0.336 / -0.370 / -0.614
TP6 / 13 / 13 / 13 / 13 / 13 / -0.105 / 0.276 / 0.041 / 0.195 / -0.107 / -0.372
RF1 / 16 / 16 / 16 / 15 / 14 / 13 / 0.208 / -0.231 / -0.275 / -0.048 / -0.251
RF2 / 16 / 16 / 16 / 15 / 14 / 13 / 16 / -0.067 / -0.104 / 0.078 / -0.451
RF3 / 16 / 16 / 16 / 15 / 14 / 13 / 16 / 16 / -0.066 / -0.120 / 0.190
RF4 / 15 / 15 / 15 / 15 / 14 / 13 / 15 / 15 / 15 / -0.036 / -0.001
RF5 / 14 / 14 / 14 / 14 / 14 / 13 / 14 / 14 / 14 / 14 / -0.070
RF6 / 13 / 13 / 13 / 13 / 13 / 13 / 13 / 13 / 13 / 13 / 13 / NA
1
Cohort variation, climate effects and population dynamics in a short-lived lizard
Appendix B – Adult growth and reproductive traits
Table B1. Cohort variation in adult body size(55individuals from 13 cohorts). Results are from the minimum adequate mixed effects linear model. F- indicates the low-density site and M indicates males.
Fixed effects / Estimate ± s.e. / F ndf,ddf / P valueAge (years) / 5.36 ± 0.87 / 37.91,124 / <.0001
Age^2 / -0.35 ± 0.09 / 15.61,124 / .0001
Sex / M: -6.78 ± 1.36 / 24.71,41 / <.0001
Random effects / Estimate [95% CI] / LRT test / P value
Cohort identity / 1.34 [0.72, 2.49] / 25.09 / <.0001
Female identity in cohort / 1.70 [1.21, 2.39] / 19.65 / <.0001
Residuals / 2.33 [2.06, 2.64]
Table B2. Cohort variation in parturition dates (453 females from 13 cohorts). Results are from the minimum adequate mixed effects linear model.
Fixed effects / Estimate ± s.e. / F ndf,ddf / P valueFemale SVL / -0.50 ± 0.07 / 48.671,128 / <.0001
Current temperature / -1.33 ± 0.32 / 17.641,128 / <.0001
Current rainfall / 0.013 ± 0.005 / 6.151,128 / 0.0145
Random effects / Estimate [95% CI] / LRT test / P value
Cohort identity / 2.91 [1.78, 4.76] / 45.65 / <.0001
Female identity in cohort / 3.04 [2.27, 4.09] / 11.47 / <.0001
Residuals / 4.67 [4.16, 5.26]
1
Cohort variation, climate effects and population dynamics in a short-lived lizard
Table B3. Cohort variation in reproductive failures (proportion of unviables eggs within a clutch, 314 females from 14 cohorts). Results are from the minimum adequate mixed effects generalized linear model with a logit link and binomial distribution of error terms.
Fixed effects / Estimate ± s.e. / ztest / P valueCurrent mid-gestation rainfall / 0.004 ± 0.001 / 2.73 / 0.006
Random effects / Estimate [95% CI] / LRT test / P value
Cohort identity / 0 / - / -
Female identity in cohort / 2.33 / Not available / -
Residuals / 0.82
Table B4. Cohort variation in post-parturition body condition (body mass controlled for body length, 314 females from 14 cohorts). F- indicates the low-density site.
Fixed effects / Estimate ± s.e. / F ndf,ddf / P valueFemale SVL / 0.066 ± 0.008 / 68.561,124 / <.0001
Age / 0.227 ± 0.006 / 15.451,124 / .0001
Age^2 / -0.025 ± 0.007 / 12.391,124 / .0006
Habitat / F-: -1.169 ± 0.546 / 4.581,124 / .03
SVL × Habitat / F-: 0.043 ± 0.010 / 5.381,124 / .02
Current mid-gestation temperature / 0.043 ± 0.010 / 18.71,124 / 0.0001
Random effects / Estimate [95% CI] / LRT test / P value
Cohort identity / 0.017 [0.00003, 8.08] / 0.11 / .74
Female identity in cohort / 0.193 [0.151, 0.248] / 18.47 / <.0001
Residuals / 0.258 [0.229, 0.291]
1
Cohort variation, climate effects and population dynamics in a short-lived lizard
Appendix C –Statistical models for mark-recapture analyses
Statistical models for juveniles
The recapture history file encompassed 4370 individuals and 12 birth cohorts (1989-1995, 1998-2002). We excluded the 1996 and 1997 birth cohorts since sub-adults were not searched in June-July 1998, and included one dummy variable (habitat F+), capture effort, twoindividual covariate (size at birth and birth date) and six climate covariates (rainfall and temperature during conception, past mid-gestation and early juvenile life).Individual, climate, and capture effort covariates were standardized prior to analysis, and time intervals were provided to obtain estimates of monthly survival probabilities. The effect of sex was not included in this analysis since ca. 21% of hatchling born in the laboratory could not be sexed at birth due to logistic failures. This should not be amajor problem because male and female juveniles have similar survival probabilities and sensitivities to environmental conditions (Le Galliard et al. 2005, 2006).
Table C1. Mark-recapture models for age-dependence and cohort variation in capture probabilities (a) and survival probabilities (b and c) of juvenile common lizards. The most parsimonious models according to the AICc are indicated in bold using ΔAICc<2 as a threshold criterion. Notations used in the models: Φ = survival probability, p = capture probability, a = age, a01 = early juvenile stage, a02 = late juvenile stage, cohort = birth cohort, effort = capture effort (number of capture days), ct = constant, linear = linear trend of birth cohort effect, climate = climate covariates (rainfall [rain] and temperature [tp]) during conception [c], gestation [g] and early juvenile life [j], size = snout-vent length at hatching, zone = F+ habitat (dummy variable). Notations “*” and “+” indicate additive and interaction terms, respectively, while “:” indicates that the effect is restricted to a given age class.
Model number and name / AICc score / ΔAICc / AICc weight / Model likelihood / Rank / Deviance(a) Selection of a cohort model describing recapture probabilities
1. Φa*cohort pa*cohort # / 6961.25 / 0.00 / 1 / 1 / 60 / 6839.85
2. Φa*cohort pa+cohort / 6992.92 / 31.66 / 0 / 0 / 50 / 6891.94
3. Φa*cohort pa*effort / 7010.92 / 49.66 / 0 / 0 / 40 / 6930.29
4. Φa*cohort pcohort / 7024.37 / 63.12 / 0 / 0 / 48 / 6927.47
5. Φa*cohort pa / 7028.62 / 67.37 / 0 / 0 / 38 / 6952.05
6. Φa*cohort pct / 7051.94 / 90.68 / 0 / 0 / 37 / 6977.40
(b) Selection of a cohort model describing survival probabilities
7. Φa01:cohort pa*cohort / 6955.71 / 0.00 / 0.7935 / 1 / 49 / 6856.77
8. Φa01:linear pa*cohort / 6959.25 / 3.54 / 0.1452 / 0.1703 / 39 / 6880.65
1. Φa*cohort pa*cohort / 6961.25 / 5.54 / 0.0496 / 0.0625 / 60 / 6839.85
9. Φa+cohort pa*cohort / 6962.91 / 7.20 / 0.0217 / 0.0274 / 49 / 6863.97
10. Φa pa*cohort / 6975.36 / 19.65 / 0.0000 / 0.0001 / 38 / 6898.80
11. Φct pa*cohort / 7042.21 / 86.50 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 37 / 6967.67
12. Φcohort pa*cohort / 7048.96 / 93.25 / 0 / 0 / 48 / 6952.06
(c) Selection of a covariate model describing survival probabilities
13. Φa01:(raing+rainj+size+birthd) pa*cohort / 6880.82 / 0.00 / 1.0000 / 1.0000 / 42 / 6796.13
14. Φa01:(raing+rainj+birthd) pa*cohort / 6900.63 / 19.81 / 0.0001 / 0.0001 / 41 / 6817.97
15. Φa01:(size+birthd) pa*cohort / 6906.49 / 25.67 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 40 / 6825.86
16. Φa01:birthd pa*cohort / 6923.91 / 43.09 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 39 / 6845.31
17. Φa01:(birthd+zone) pa*cohort / 6932.75 / 51.94 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 40 / 6852.13
18. Φa01:(raing+rainj+size) pa*cohort / 6944.83 / 64.01 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 41 / 6862.17
19. Φa01:(raing+rainj) pa*cohort / 6952.59 / 71.78 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 40 / 6871.97
7. Φa01:cohort pa*cohort / 6955.71 / 74.89 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 49 / 6856.77
20. Φa01:rainj pa*cohort / 6956.74 / 75.92 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 39 / 6878.14
21. Φa01:(rainj+rainc) pa*cohort / 6956.98 / 76.16 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 40 / 6876.35
22. Φa01:(rainj+tpc) pa*cohort / 6957.62 / 76.80 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 40 / 6876.99
23. Φa01:(rainj+tpj) pa*cohort / 6958.07 / 77.25 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 40 / 6877.44
24. Φa01:(rainj+tpg) pa*cohort / 6958.14 / 77.32 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 40 / 6877.51
25. Φa01:tpj pa*cohort / 6961.57 / 80.75 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 39 / 6882.98
26. Φa01:size pa*cohort / 6970.26 / 89.44 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 39 / 6891.66
27. Φa01:rainc pa*cohort / 6971.04 / 90.22 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 39 / 6892.45
28. Φa01:raing pa*cohort / 6971.47 / 90.65 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 39 / 6892.88
29. Φa01:tpg pa*cohort / 6972.86 / 92.04 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 39 / 6894.26
30. Φa01:zone pa*cohort / 6974.46 / 93.64 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 39 / 6895.86
31. Φa01:tpc pa*cohort / 6974.84 / 94.02 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 39 / 6896.24
32. Φa01:raing pa*cohort / 6982.91 / 102.09 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 39 / 6904.31
10. Φa pa*cohort / 6984.80 / 103.98 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 38 / 6908.23
33. Φa01:rainc pa*cohort / 6986.44 / 105.63 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 39 / 6907.85
# Model on which the GOF tests were performed. No evidence of lack of fit was found.
Statistical models for sub-adults and adults
The data set totalized 1058 histories and 11 cohorts (1997 was excluded since we did not search for sub-adults in June-July 1998). Adult males, but not females, were not searched for in 1998 and we therefore fixed the capture probabilities of males to zero in 1998. Fixed parameters were discounted from the model selection procedure. Sexes were treated as separate groups since males and females have distinct life histories(Massot et al. 1992). The analysis also included habitat (F+ or F-) and origin (born in laboratory or in the field) as dummy variables, ten climate covariates (rainfall and temperature during conception, past mid-gestation, early juvenile life and late juvenile life, and sub-adult life), and capture effort (number of days spent in the field). Annual survival probabilities were estimated.
Table C2. Mark-recapture models for age-dependence and cohort variation in capture probabilities (a) and survival probabilities (b, c and d) of sub-adult and adult common lizards. The most parsimonious models according to the QAICc (over-dispersion coefficient, ĉ = 1.20) are indicated in bold using ΔQAICc<2 as a threshold criterion. Notations used in the models are similar than in Table C1 with the exception of age classification (a1 = sub-adult stage, a2 = age 2 years adult, a2 = age 3 years adult, a2-3 = pooled age 2 and 3 years adult, jl = late juvenile life stage, s = sub-adult life stage),and origin (dummy variable = born in the laboratory).
Model number and name / QAICc score / ΔQAICc / QAICc weight / Model likelihood / Rank / QDeviance(a) Selection of a cohort model describing recapture probabilities
1. Φa*cohort*sex peffort † / 1913.70 / 0.00 / 0.2176 / 1.0000 / 81 / 1742.61
2. Φa*cohort*sex pa+effort † / 1913.80 / 0.10 / 0.2074 / 0.9532 / 83 / 1738.24
3. Φa*cohort*sex pa*cohort † / 1914.34 / 0.64 / 0.1579 / 0.7253 / 108 / 1681.92
4. Φa*cohort*sex peffort+sex † / 1914.59 / 0.89 / 0.1397 / 0.6420 / 82 / 1741.26
5. Φa*cohort*sex pa † / 1916.47 / 2.77 / 0.0546 / 0.2509 / 82 / 1743.14
6. Φa*cohort*sex pa*cohort+sex † / 1916.48 / 2.78 / 0.0543 / 0.2493 / 109 / 1681.74
7. Φa*cohort*sex pct † / 1916.65 / 2.95 / 0.0497 / 0.2285 / 80 / 1747.79
8. Φa*cohort*sex psex † / 1917.42 / 3.71 / 0.0340 / 0.1561 / 81 / 1746.32
9. Φa*cohort*sex pa+sex † / 1917.67 / 3.97 / 0.0299 / 0.1372 / 83 / 1742.12
10. Φa*cohort*sex pcohort+sex † / 1919.25 / 5.55 / 0.0136 / 0.0624 / 90 / 1727.97
11. Φa*cohort*sex pa+cohort † / 1919.36 / 5.66 / 0.0128 / 0.0590 / 92 / 1723.56
12. Φa*cohort*sex pa*sex † / 1919.69 / 5.99 / 0.0109 / 0.0500 / 85 / 1739.66
13. Φa*cohort*sex pcohort † / 1919.73 / 6.02 / 0.0107 / 0.0492 / 90 / 1728.44
14. Φa*cohort*sex pa+cohort+sex † / 1921.33 / 7.63 / 0.0048 / 0.0220 / 93 / 1723.27
15. Φa*cohort*sex pcohort+a*sex † / 1923.86 / 10.16 / 0.0014 / 0.0062 / 95 / 1721.25
16. Φa*cohort*sex pcohort*sex † / 1927.11 / 13.41 / 0.0003 / 0.0012 / 100 / 1713.10
17. Φa*cohort*sex pa+cohort*sex † / 1927.13 / 13.43 / 0.0003 / 0.0012 / 102 / 1708.54
18. Φa*cohort*sex pcohort*sex † / 1927.24 / 13.54 / 0.0003 / 0.0011 / 100 / 1713.24
19. Φa*cohort*sex pa*cohort*sex #† / 1940.82 / 27.12 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 128 / 1661.47
(b) Selection of a cohort model describing survival probabilities
20. Φa*cohort+sex peffort / 1875.10 / 0.00 / 0.8773 / 1.0000 / 47 / 1778.08
21. Φa+cohort+sex peffort / 1879.50 / 4.40 / 0.0973 / 0.1109 / 17 / 1845.10
22. Φcohort+a*sex peffort / 1882.39 / 7.29 / 0.0229 / 0.0261 / 20 / 1841.84
23. Φa+cohort*sex peffort / 1886.92 / 11.82 / 0.0024 / 0.0027 / 27 / 1831.92
24. Φa+sex peffort / 1892.79 / 17.69 / 0.0001 / 0.0001 / 7 / 1878.72
25. Φa*sex peffort / 1895.68 / 20.58 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 10 / 1875.54
26. Φcohort+sex peffort / 1907.64 / 32.53 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 14 / 1879.36
27. Φsex peffort / 1913.40 / 38.30 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 4 / 1905.37
1. Φa*cohort*sex peffort † / 1913.70 / 38.60 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 81 / 1742.61
28. Φcohort*sex peffort / 1917.23 / 42.12 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 24 / 1868.44
29. Φcohort*a peffort / 1976.05 / 100.94 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 46 / 1881.16
30. Φcohort+a peffort / 1976.12 / 101.02 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 16 / 1943.77
31. Φcohort peffort / 1981.13 / 106.03 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 13 / 1954.89
32. Φa peffort / 1985.95 / 110.84 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 6 / 1973.89
33. Φct peffort / 1987.10 / 112.00 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 3 / 1981.09
(c) Selection of a model describing age and cohort-dependent survival probabilities
34. Φa1:cohort+a2-3+sex peffort / 1862.41 / 0.00 / 0.6251 / 1.0000 / 16 / 1830.05
35. Φa1:cohort+a2+a3+sex peffort / 1864.45 / 2.04 / 0.2249 / 0.3598 / 17 / 1830.05
36. Φa1:cohort+a2:cohort+a3+sex peffort / 1865.36 / 2.95 / 0.1427 / 0.2283 / 27 / 1810.36
37. Φa1:cohort*sex+a2-3+sex peffort / 1871.63 / 9.22 / 0.0062 / 0.0100 / 27 / 1816.63
20. Φa:cohort+sex peffort / 1875.10 / 12.70 / 0.0011 / 0.0017 / 47 / 1778.08
38. Φa1+a2-3+sex peffort / 1890.77 / 28.37 / 0.0000 / 0.0000 / 6 / 1878.72
(d) Selection of a covariate model describing survival probabilities
34. Φa1:cohort+a2-3+sex peffort / 1862.41 / 0.0000 / 0.3614 / 1 / 16 / 1830.05
35. Φa1:(cohort+zone)+a2-3+sex peffort / 1863.26 / 0.8546 / 0.2357 / 0.6523 / 17 / 1828.86
36. Φa1:cohort+a2-3+a:zone+sex peffort / 1864.16 / 1.7481 / 0.1508 / 0.4173 / 18 / 1827.71
37. Φa1:cohort+a2-3+zone+sex peffort / 1864.41 / 2.0038 / 0.1327 / 0.3672 / 17 / 1830.01
38. Φa1:cohort+a2-3+a:origin+sex peffort / 1864.62 / 2.2168 / 0.1193 / 0.3301 / 18 / 1828.18
39. Φa1:tpc+a2-3+sex peffort / 1881.70 / 19.2904 / 0.0000 / 0.0001 / 7 / 1867.62
40. Φa1:precs+a2-3+sex peffort / 1882.19 / 19.7781 / 0.0000 / 0.0001 / 7 / 1868.11
41. Φa1:tpj+a2-3+sex peffort / 1887.48 / 25.0745 / 0.0000 / 0 / 7 / 1873.41
42. Φa1:rainc+a2-3+sex peffort / 1890.05 / 27.6418 / 0.0000 / 0 / 7 / 1875.98
38. Φa1+a2-3+sex peffort / 1890.77 / 28.3674 / 0.0000 / 0 / 6 / 1878.72
43. Φa1:raing+a2-3+sex peffort / 1891.09 / 28.6814 / 0.0000 / 0 / 7 / 1877.02
44. Φa1:rainj+a2-3+sex peffort / 1891.17 / 28.7604 / 0.0000 / 0 / 7 / 1877.09
45. Φa1:tpjl+a2-3+sex peffort / 1891.62 / 29.2155 / 0.0000 / 0 / 7 / 1877.55
46. Φa1:tpg+a2-3+sex peffort / 1891.96 / 29.5550 / 0.0000 / 0 / 7 / 1877.89
47. Φa1:rainjl+a2-3+sex peffort / 1892.36 / 29.9538 / 0.0000 / 0 / 7 / 1878.29
48. Φa1:tps+a2-3+sex peffort / 1892.73 / 30.3269 / 0.0000 / 0 / 7 / 1878.66
# Model on which the GOF tests were performed. Evidence of a slight lack of fit was found and an over-dispersion coefficient (ĉ = 1.20) was included.
† Models for which some of the parameters could not be estimated due to limited data; the number of identifiable parameters was estimated with M-SURGE using a numerical approach (Choquet et al. 2005)
Table C3. Estimates of the mean, cohort variance and coefficient of variation for sub-adult and adult survival in each sex and age class. Estimates were obtained from the best selected mark-recapture model in Table C2b, which controlled for variation in capture probabilities due to capture effort. Survival was calculated from age 1 to age 2 (Φ1), from age 2 to age 3 (Φ2) and from age 3 to age 4 (Φ3) for male and female lizards.
Φ1 / Φ2 / Φ3Males / Females / Males / Females / Males / Females
Mean (± se) / 0.30 ± 0.06 / 0.67 ± 0.06 / 0.15 ± 0.03 / 0.57 ± 0.07 / 0.09 ± 0.02 / 0.53 ± 0.08
Variance
[95% CL] / 0.023
[0.006, 0.10] / 0.026
[0.009, 0.10] / 0.002
[-0.006, 0.06] / 0.023
[0.006, 0.10] / 0.0008
[-0.001, 0.015] / 0.006
[-0.009, 0.09]
CV / 0.50 / 0.24 / 0.30 / 0.27 / < 0.01 / 0.15
References cited
Choquet, R., A. M. Reboulet, R. Pradel, O. Gimenez, and J. D. Lebreton. 2005. M-SURGE 1.8 User's manual. CEFE, Montpellier, France.
Le Galliard, J.-F., R. Ferrière, and J. Clobert. 2005. Juvenile growth and survival under dietary restriction: are males and females equal? Oikos 111:368-376.
Le Galliard, J.-F., M. Massot, S. Meylan, M. Landys, and J. Clobert. 2006. Ontogenic sources of variation in sexual size dimorphism in a lizard. Journal of Evolutionary Ecology 19:690-704.
Massot, M., J. Clobert, T. Pilorge, J. Lecomte, and R. Barbault. 1992. Density dependence in the common lizard: demographic consequences of a density manipulation. Ecology 73:1742-1756.
Appendix D – Cohort covariation between life history traits
We calculated the mean and variance of the life history traits for each cohort. We included in this analysis the life history traits that exhibited significant cohort variation: birth date (Date_B, time interval since June 1, normal distribution), size at birth(SVL_B, mm, normal distribution), juvenile growth rate (Growth_J, mm.day-1, normal distribution), early juvenile survival (Surv_J, monthly survival probability, binomial distribution), sub-adult growth rate (Growth_S, mm.day-1, normal distribution), sub-adult survival (Surv_S, annual survival probability, binomial distribution), total clutch size (TCS, log-normal distribution) and adult body size (SVL_A, mm, normal distribution).
Table D1.Pairwise correlations between life history traits (upper triangular matrix: Pearson’s product moment correlations and p values, diagonal: number of cohorts sampledfor each life history trait, lower triangular matrix: Spearman’s rho statistics and p values). Significant correlations are bolded without correction for multiple testing.
Date_B / SVL_B / Surv_J / Growth_J / Surv_S / Growth_S / TCS / SVL_ADate_B / n = 15 / -0.071
p = 0.800 / -0.286
p = 0.344 / 0.331
p = 0.248 / -0.239
p = 0.479 / 0.102
p = 0.740 / -0.329
p = 0.297 / -0.464
p = 0.80
SVL_B / 0.021
p = 0.939 / n = 15 / 0.025
p = 0.936 / -0.071
p = 0.808 / -0.035
p = 0.918 / 0.076
p = 0.805 / 0.361
p = 0.249 / 0.414
p = 0.180
Surv_J / -0.286
p = 0.344 / 0.170
p = 0.572 / n = 13 / 0.081
p = 0.793 / 0.346
p = 0.297 / -0.01
p = 0.974 / -0.19
p = 0.576 / 0.213
p = 0.530
Growth_J / 0.235
p = 0.413 / -0.288
p = 0.318 / 0.120
p = 0.689 / n = 14 / -0.058
p = 0.867 / -0.687
p = 0.009 / 0.155
p = 0.649 / 0.051
p = 0.882
Surv_S / -0.264
p = 0.435 / 0.136
p = 0.683 / 0.445
p = 0.168 / -0.064
p = 0.860 / n = 12 / -0.001
p = 0.875 / 0.377
p = 0.227 / -0.143
p = 0.659
Growth_S / 0.143
p = 0.636 / 0.242
p = 0.420 / -0.093
p = 0.765 / -0.659
p = 0.017 / 0.035
p = 0.912 / n = 14 / -0.358
p = 0.254 / 0.076
p = 0.815
TCS / -0.476
p = 0.121 / 0.329
p = 0.292 / -0.009
p = 0.989 / 0.155
p = 0.644 / 0.322
p = 0.303 / -0.294
p = 0.354 / n = 13 / 0.634
p = 0.02
SVL_A / -0.168
p = 0.604 / 0.266
p = 0.398 / -0.400
p = 0.225 / 0.136
p = 0.683 / -0.266
p = 0.404 / 0.021
p = 0.957 / 0.626
p = 0.024 / n = 13
Appendix E – Matrix projection model
Table E1. Long-term mean (± s.e.) estimates from the field, growth sensitivity and growth elasticity of each vital rate. Sensitivity and elasticity were calculated from an age-structured transition matrix. Estimates are given on the logit scale for proportional data and on the log-normal scale for total clutch size. Bold estimates give values on the natural scale.
Vital rate / Field estimates / Sensitivity / ElasticityAnnual juvenile survival / 27.9% / 0.845 / 0.244
Monthly early survival / 0.129 (± 0.126) / 0.443
Monthly late survival / 2.601 (± 0.141) / 2.282
Annual sub-adult survival / 65.4%
0.635 (± 0.162) / 0.361 / 0.244
Annual adult survival / 50.6%
0.024 (± 0.108) / 0.512 / 0.268
Fecundity / 2.361 / 0.099 / 0.244
Total clutch size / 1.619 (± 0.363) / 0.044
Hatching success / 2.380 (± 0.073) / 0.258
Sex ratio (% females) / -0.087 (± 0.028) / 0.494
1