Search for: All records

Anthropogenically fragmented populations may have reduced fitness due to loss of genetic diversity and inbreeding. The extent of such fitness losses due to fragmentation and potential gains from conservation actions are infrequently assessed together empirically. Controlled crosses within and among populations can identify whether populations are at risk of inbreeding depression and whether inter-population crossing alleviates fitness loss. Because fitness depends on the environment and life stage, studies quantifying cumulative fitness over a large portion of the lifecycle in conditions that mimic natural environments are most informative. To assess the fitness consequences of habitat fragmentation, we leveraged controlled within-family, within-population, and between-population crosses to quantify inbreeding depression and heterosis in seven populations of Echinacea angustifolia within a 6,400-ha area. We then assessed cumulative offspring fitness after 14 yr of growth in a natural experimental plot (N = 1,136). The mean fitness of progeny from within-population crosses varied considerably, indicating genetic differentiation among source populations, even though these sites are all less than 9 km apart. The fitness consequences of within-family and between-population crosses varied in magnitude and direction. Only one of the seven populations showed inbreeding depression of high effect, while four populations showed substantial heterosis. Outbreeding depression was rare and slight. Our findings indicate that local crossings between isolated populations yield unpredictable fitness consequences ranging from slight decreases to substantial increases. Interestingly, inbreeding depression and heterosis did not relate closely to population size, suggesting that all fragmented populations could contribute to conservation goals as either pollen recipients or donors. 

Abstract PremiseUnderstanding how population dynamics vary in space and time is critical for understanding the basic life history and conservation needs of a species, especially for narrow endemic species whose populations are often in similar environments and therefore at increased risk of extinction under climate change. Here, we investigated the spatial and temporal variation in population dynamics ofRanunculus austro‐oreganus, a perennial buttercup endemic to fragmented prairie habitat in one county in southern Oregon. MethodsWe performed demographic surveys of three populations ofR. austro‐oreganusover 4 years (2015–2018). We used size‐structured population models and life table response experiments to investigate vital rates driving spatiotemporal variation in population growth. ResultsOverall,R. austro‐oreganushad positive or stable stochastic population growth rates, though individual vital rates and overall population growth varied substantially among sites and years. All populations had their greatest growth in the same year, suggesting potential synchrony associated with climate conditions. Differences in survival contributed most to spatial variation in population growth, while differences in reproduction contributed most to temporal variation in population growth. ConclusionsPopulations of this extremely narrow endemic appear stable, with positive growth during our study window. These results suggest that populations ofR. austro‐oreganusare able to persist if their habitat is not eliminated by land‐use change. Nonetheless, its narrow distribution and synchronous population dynamics suggest the need for continued monitoring, particularly with ongoing habitat loss and climate change. 

Although many species shift their phenology with climate change, species vary significantly in the direction and magnitude of these responses (i.e., phenological sensitivity). Studies increasingly detect early phenology or high phenological sensitivity to climate in non-native species, which may favor non-native species over natives in warming climates. Yet relatively few studies explicitly compare phenological responses to climate between native vs. non-native species or between non-native populations in the native vs. introduced range, limiting our ability to quantify the role of phenology in invasion success. Here, we review the empirical evidence for and against differences in phenology and phenological sensitivity to climate in both native vs. non-native species and native and introduced populations of non-native species. Contrary to common assumptions, native and non-native plant species did not consistently differ in mean phenology or phenological sensitivity. However, non-native plant species were often either just as or more sensitive, but rarely less sensitive, to climate as natives. Introduced populations of non-native plant species often show earlier reproduction than native populations of the same species, but there was mixed evidence for differences in phenological sensitivity between introduced and native plant populations. We found very few studies comparing native vs. invasive animal phenology. Future work should characterize phenological sensitivity to climate in native vs. non-native plant and animal species, in native vs. introduced populations of non-native species, and across different stages of invasion, and should carefully consider how differences in phenology might promote invasion success or disadvantage native species under climate change.