Energetics, lifestyle, and reproduction in birds

Theoretical and empirical studies of life history aim to account for resource allocation to the different components of fitness: survival, growth, and reproduction. The pioneering evolutionary ecologist David Lack [(1968) Ecological Adaptations for Breeding in Birds (Methuen and Co.,London)] suggested that reproductive output in birds reflects adaptation to environmental factors such as availability of food and risk of predation, but subsequent studies have not always supported Lack’s interpretation. Here using a dataset for 980 bird species (Dataset S1), a phylogeny, and an explicit measure of reproductive productivity, we test predictions for how mass-specific productivity varies with body size, phylogeny,and lifestyle traits. We find that productivity varies negatively with body size and energetic demands of parental care and positively with extrinsic mortality. Specifically: (i) altricial species are 50% less productive than precocial species; (ii) species with female-only care of offspring are about 20% less productive than species with other methods of parental care; (iii) nonmigrants are 14% less productive than migrants; (iv) frugivores and nectarivores are about 20% less productive than those eating other foods; and (v) pelagic foragers are 40% less productive than those feeding in other habitats. A strong signal of phylogeny suggests that syndromes of similar life-history traits tend to be conservative within clades but also to have evolved independently in different clades. Our results generally support both Lack’s pioneering studies and subsequent research on avian life history.

Putting the S-word back into Sustainability: Can we be more social?

In an era dominated by climate change debate and environmentalism there is a real danger that the important ‘social’ pillar of sustainability drops out of our vocabulary. This can happen at a variety of scales from business level through to building and neighbourhood level regeneration and development. Social sustainability should be at the heart of all housing and mixed-use development but for a variety of reasons tends to be frequently underplayed. The recent English city riots have brought this point back sharply into focus. The relationships between people, places and the local economy all matter and this is as true today as it was in the late 19th century when Patrick Geddes, the great pioneering town planner and ecologist, wrote of ‘place-work-folk’. This paper, commissioned from Tim Dixon, explains what is meant by social sustainability (and how it is linked to concepts such as social capital and social cohesion); why the debate matters during a period when ‘localism’ is dominating political debate; and what is inhibiting its growth and its measurement. The paper reviews best practice in post-occupancy social sustainability metric systems, based on recent research undertaken by the author on Dockside Green in Vancouver, and identifi es some of the key operational issues in mainstreaming the concept within major mixed-use projects. The paper concludes by offering a framework for the key challenges faced in setting strategic corporate goals and objectives; prioritising and selecting the most appropriate investments; and measuring social sustainability performance by identifying the required data sources