Body Size of Insular Carnivores: Little Support for the Island Rule

• Published in: The American naturalist Vol. 163; no. 3; pp. 469 - 479
• Main Authors: Meiri, Shai, Dayan, Tamar, Simberloff, Daniel
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States The University of Chicago Press 01-03-2004; University of Chicago, acting through its Press
• Subjects: Adaptation, Physiological; Animal behavior; Animal populations; Animals; Average linear density; Biological Evolution; Biological variation; Body Size; Canines; Carnivora - anatomy & histology; Carnivores; Dwarfism; Evolution; Geography; Gigantism; Lupus; Mammals; Population Dynamics; Population size; body size; island rule; geographic variation; Carnivora; optimal body size
• ISSN: 0003-0147; 1537-5323
• DOI: 10.1086/382229

Large mammals are thought to evolve to be smaller on islands, whereas small mammals grow larger. A negative correlation between relative size of island individuals and body mass is termed the “island rule.” Several mechanisms—mainly competitive release, resource limitation, dispersal ability, and lighter predation pressure on islands, as well as a general physiological advantage of modal size—have been advanced to explain this pattern. We measured skulls and teeth of terrestrial members of the order Carnivora in order to analyze patterns of body size evolution between insular populations and their near mainland conspecifics. No correlations were found between the size ratios of insular/mainland carnivore species and body mass. Only little support for the island rule is found when individual populations rather than species are considered. Our data are at odds with those advanced in support of theories of optimal body size. Carnivore size is subjected to a host of selective pressures that do not vary uniformly from place to place. Mass alone cannot account for the patterns in body size of insular carnivores.