Cited by 123Animal Behavior and ReproductionEvolution and Paleontology StudiesEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior

The Offspring‐Size/Clutch‐Size Trade‐Off in Mammals

Open access
Charnov, Eric L., Ernest, S. K. Morgan·2006·The American Naturalist

Abstract

The Smith-Fretwell model for optimal offspring size assumes the existence of an inverse proportional relationship (i.e., trade-off) between the number of offspring and the amount of resources invested in an individual offspring; virtually all of the many models derived from theirs make the same trade-off assumption. Over the last 30 years it has become apparent that the predicted proportionality is often not observed when evaluated across species. We develop a general allometric approach to correct for size-related differences in the resources available for reproduction. Using data on mammals, we demonstrate that the predicted inverse proportional relationship between number of offspring and offspring size is closely approached after correcting for allocation, though there is a slight curvature in the relationship. We discuss applications for this approach to other organisms, possible causes for the curvature, and the usefulness of allometries for estimating life-history variables that are difficult to measure.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/501141

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Increased energy throughput is associated with increased reproductive output within and among species.

    “Both within (2) and among (3) species, increased energy throughput (i.e., calories consumed and expended per day) is associated with increased reproductive output (i.e., grams of offspring produced per year).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Charnov, E. L. 1993. Life history invariants. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Charnov, E. L., & Ernest, S. K. M.
Affiliations
  • University of New Mexico (US)
  • Utah State University (US)
Venue
The American Naturalist
Published
2006-04
Volume
167
Issue
4
Pages
578-582
ISSN
  • 0003-0147 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5323
OpenAlex
W2086995370
Cited by
123
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 6
FWCI
7.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The American Naturalist (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Commons - USU (Utah State University) (submittedVersion)
  • UNM’s Digital Repository (University of New Mexico) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Keywords
offspring size, clutch size, offspring number, resource allocation, allometry, life-history trade-offs, mammals, reproductive investment
MeSH terms
Animals, Litter Size, Mammals, Body Size

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review