Ecological Archives E094-114-A5

P. M. Waser, K. M. Nichols, J. D. Hadfield. 2013. Fitness consequences of dispersal: Is leaving home the best of a bad lot?. Ecology 94:1287–1295. http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/12-1037.1

Appendix E. A table comparing the impact of dispersal phenotype on yearling recruitment from animals of central vs. peripheral origin.

Table E1. Table comparing the impact of dispersal phenotype on yearling recruitment from animals of central vs. peripheral origin. Parameters are presented as the ratio of the odds that a centrally-born individual of the designated dispersal phenotype produces an offspring that survives to reproductive maturity, relative to the odds for an animal of the same phenotype born on the study site periphery. In all cases, the 95% highest posterior density (HPD) interval overlaps 1.0.

Sex

Dispersal phenotype

Recruitment

Posterior mean

95% HPD interval

Female

Philopatric

1.64

0.87 to 3.33

Within population

1.29

0.67 to 2.44

Between population

2.61

0.35 to 27.30

Male

Philopatric

0.92

0.56 to 1.58

Within population

0.92

0.56 to 1.41

Between population

1.04

0.44 to 2.48


[Back to E094-114]