Variability in life-history and ecological traits is a buffer against extinction in mammals

Anthropogenic degradation of the world's ecosystems is leading to a widespread and accelerating loss of biodiversity. However, not all species respond equally to existing threats, raising the question: what makes a species more vulnerable to extinction? We propose that higher intraspecific variability may reduce the risk of extinction, as different individuals and populations within a species may respond differently to occurring threats. Supporting this prediction, our results show that mammalian species with more variable adult body masses, litter sizes, sexual maturity ages and population densities are less vulnerable to extinction. Our findings reveal the role of local variation among populations, particularly of large mammals, as a buffering mechanism against extinction, and emphasise the importance of considering trait variation in comparative analyses and conservation management.

Biases in comparative analyses of extinction risk: mind the gap

1. Comparative analyses are used to address the key question of what makes a species more prone to extinction by exploring the links between vulnerability and intrinsic species’ traits and/or extrinsic factors. This approach requires comprehensive species data but information is rarely available for all species of interest. As a result comparative analyses often rely on subsets of relatively few species that are assumed to be representative samples of the overall studied group. 2. Our study challenges this assumption and quantifies the taxonomic, spatial, and data type biases associated with the quantity of data available for 5415 mammalian species using the freely available life-history database PanTHERIA. 3. Moreover, we explore how existing biases influence results of comparative analyses of extinction risk by using subsets of data that attempt to correct for detected biases. In particular, we focus on links between four species’ traits commonly linked to vulnerability (distribution range area, adult body mass, population density and gestation length) and conduct univariate and multivariate analyses to understand how biases affect model predictions. 4. Our results show important biases in data availability with c.22% of mammals completely lacking data. Missing data, which appear to be not missing at random, occur frequently in all traits (14–99% of cases missing). Data availability is explained by intrinsic traits, with larger mammals occupying bigger range areas being the best studied. Importantly, we find that existing biases affect the results of comparative analyses by overestimating the risk of extinction and changing which traits are identified as important predictors. 5. Our results raise concerns over our ability to draw general conclusions regarding what makes a species more prone to extinction. Missing data represent a prevalent problem in comparative analyses, and unfortunately, because data are not missing at random, conventional approaches to fill data gaps, are not valid or present important challenges. These results show the importance of making appropriate inferences from comparative analyses by focusing on the subset of species for which data are available. Ultimately, addressing the data bias problem requires greater investment in data collection and dissemination, as well as the development of methodological approaches to effectively correct existing biases.

Dinosaurs in decline tens of millions of years before their final extinction

Whether dinosaurs were in a long-term decline or whether they were reigning strong right up to their final disappearance at the Cretaceous–Paleogene (K-Pg) mass extinction event 66 Mya has been debated for decades with no clear resolution. The dispute has continued unresolved because of a lack of statistical rigor and appropriate evolutionary framework. Here, for the first time to our knowledge, we apply a Bayesian phylogenetic approach to model the evolutionary dynamics of speciation and extinction through time in Mesozoic dinosaurs, properly taking account of previously ignored statistical violations. We find overwhelming support for a long-term decline across all dinosaurs and within all three dinosaurian subclades (Ornithischia, Sauropodomorpha, and Theropoda), where speciation rate slowed down through time and was ultimately exceeded by extinction rate tens of millions of years before the K-Pg boundary. The only exceptions to this general pattern are the morphologically specialized herbivores, the Hadrosauriformes and Ceratopsidae, which show rapid species proliferations throughout the Late Cretaceous instead. Our results highlight that, despite some heterogeneity in speciation dynamics, dinosaurs showed a marked reduction in their ability to replace extinct species with new ones, making them vulnerable to extinction and unable to respond quickly to and recover from the final catastrophic event.

Nothing is safe: intolerance of uncertainty is associated with compromised fear extinction learning

Extinction-resistant fear is considered to be a central feature of pathological anxiety. Here we sought to determine if individual differences in Intolerance of Uncertainty (IU), a potential risk factor for anxiety disorders, underlies compromised fear extinction. We tested this hypothesis by recording electrodermal activity in 38 healthy participants during fear acquisition and extinction. We assessed the temporality of fear extinction, by examining early and late extinction learning. During early extinction, low IU was associated with larger skin conductance responses to learned threat vs. safety cues, whereas high IU was associated with skin conductance responding to both threat and safety cues, but no cue discrimination. During late extinction, low IU showed no difference in skin conductance between learned threat and safety cues, whilst high IU predicted continued fear expression to learned threat, indexed by larger skin conductance to threat vs. safety cues. These findings suggest a critical role of uncertainty-based mechanisms in the maintenance of learned fear.

Larger brain size indirectly increases vulnerability to extinction in mammals

Although previous studies have addressed the question of why large brains evolved, we have limited understanding of potential beneficial or detrimental effects of enlarged brain size in the face of current threats. Using novel phylogenetic path analysis, we evaluated how brain size directly and indirectly, via its effects on life-history and ecology, influences vulnerability to extinction across 474 mammalian species. We found that larger brains, controlling for body size, indirectly increase vulnerability to extinction by extending the gestation period, increasing weaning age, and limiting litter sizes. However, we found no evidence of direct, beneficial or detrimental, effects of brain size on vulnerability to extinction, even when we explicitly considered the different types of threats that lead to vulnerability. Order-specific analyses revealed qualitatively similar patterns for Carnivora and Artiodactyla. Interestingly, for Primates, we found that larger brain size was directly (and indirectly) associated with increased vulnerability to extinction. Our results indicate that under current conditions the constraints on life-history imposed by large brains outweigh the potential benefits, undermining the resilience of the studied mammals. Contrary to the selective forces that have favoured increased brain size throughout evolutionary history, at present, larger brains have become a burden for mammals.