z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Which proximate factor determines sexual size dimorphism in tiger snakes?
Author(s) -
BONNET XAVIER,
LORIOUX SOPHIE,
PEARSON DAVID,
AUBRET FABIEN,
BRADSHAW DON,
DELMAS VIRGINIE,
FAUVEL THOMAS
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
biological journal of the linnean society
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.906
H-Index - 112
eISSN - 1095-8312
pISSN - 0024-4066
DOI - 10.1111/j.1095-8312.2011.01633.x
Subject(s) - sexual dimorphism , biology , predation , reproduction , sexual maturity , zoology , ecology , captivity
Diverse interactions between factors that influence body size complicate the identification of the primary determinants of sexual size dimorphism. Using data from a long‐term field study (1997–2009), we examined the contributions of the main proximate factors potentially influencing sexual size dimorphism from birth to adulthood in tiger snakes ( Notechis scutatus ). Data on body size, body mass and body condition of neonates, juveniles and adults were obtained by mark–recapture. Frequent recaptures allowed us to monitor reproductive status, diet and food intake, and to estimate survival and growth rates in age and sex classes. Additional data from females held briefly in captivity enabled us to assess reproductive output and the body mass lost at parturition (proxies for reproductive effort). From birth to maturity, individuals of both sexes experienced similar growth and mortality rates. We found no difference in diet, feeding and survival rates between the sexes, nor between juveniles and adults. On maturity, despite comparable diet and food intake by both sexes, the high energy requirements of vitellogenesis and gestation were responsible for a depletion of body reserves and probably resulted in a marked decrease in growth rates. Males were largely exempt from such costs of reproduction, and so could grow faster than females and attain larger body sizes. The absence of niche divergence between the sexes (uniformity of habitat, lack of predators) suggests that the impact of differential energetic investment for reproduction on growth rate is probably the main proximate factor influencing sexual size dimorphism in this species. © 2011 The Linnean Society of London, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society , 2011, 103 , 668–680.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here