Editorial Type:
Article Category: Research Article
 | 
Online Publication Date: 04 May 2015

Are Commonly Used Fitness Predictors Accurate? A Meta-analysis of Amphibian Size and Age at Metamorphosis

and
Page Range: 297 – 309
DOI: 10.1643/CH-14-128
Save
Download PDF

Reaching developmental milestones younger and at larger sizes is commonly claimed to reflect increased fitness. However, the amount of fitness gained from being larger and younger at a milestone may vary with several attributes, particularly evolutionary history, life history, and environmental characteristics. We used a meta-analysis to investigate whether these attributes affected the utility of developmental milestones to be used as predictors of future fitness. We chose amphibian size at and time to metamorphosis (SAM and TTM, respectively) as model developmental milestones, because studies have examined SAM and TTM's efficacy for fitness prediction (via post-metamorphic fitness proxies), and they are commonly used in a variety of studies testing ecological and evolutionary theory and more applied research on the effects of anthropogenic stressors. We found variation in the predictive power of SAM and TTM for post-metamorphic performance. SAM was a more consistent predictor of post-metamorphic performance than TTM, but also had a higher sample size. Life history and study design (i.e., laboratory vs. field studies), but not evolutionary history, were important for explaining variation in predictive power for post-metamorphic performance. The correlation between SAM and performance increased with the proportion of time to maturity reached at metamorphosis, suggesting that species can compensate for initial fitness reductions through ontogeny. Because numerous researchers use size and age at developmental milestones to indicate fitness, we urge caution in interpreting their results due to the species- and system-specific nature of fitness surrogates.

Copyright: © 2015 by the American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists
Fig. 1. 
Fig. 1. 

Proposed phylogeny used in the phylogenetic meta-analysis of the correlation between size at (A) and time to metamorphosis (B) and post-metamorphic fitness.


Fig. 2. 
Fig. 2. 

Correlation among the proportion of adult size and time to maturity attained at metamorphosis (A) and differences among taxonomic family in the proportion of adult size attained at metamorphosis (B). Both analyses used square root transformed proportions. Each point represents a species, and the species code labels each point (A). Different letters indicate significant differences with Tukey's pairwise comparisons (B). Error bars represent standard error (B).


Fig. 3. 
Fig. 3. 

Correlation between size at metamorphosis (SAM) and the proportion of adult size attained at metamorphosis (A) and between time to metamorphosis (TTM) and the proportion of time to maturity attained at metamorphosis (B). Each point represents a species, and the species code labels each point. Both analyses used square root transformed proportions.


Fig. 4. 
Fig. 4. 

Difference among fitness correlate measures in the time since metamorphosis when the measurements were made. Analysis used square root transformed time variable.


Fig. 5. 
Fig. 5. 

Effect of the proportion of time to maturity reached at metamorphosis on the correlation (r) between size at metamorphosis (SAM) and post-metamorphic fitness. Size of circles indicates sample size of correlation.


Contributor Notes

Associate Editor: J. Kerby

Received: 25 Aug 2014
Accepted: 03 Jan 2015
  • Download PDF