title: Comment on "The illusion of invariant quantities in life histories".
abstract: Nee et al. (Reports, 19 August 2005, p. 1236) used a null model to argue that life history invariants are illusions. We show that their results are largely inconsequential for life history theory because the authors confound two definitions of invariance, and rigorous analysis of their null model demonstrates that it does not match observed data.
authors.affiliation: Bauer Center for Genomics Research, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA. vsavage@cgr.harvard.edu
authors.forename: Van M
authors.initials: VM
authors.lastname: Savage
authors.forename: Ethan P
authors.initials: EP
authors.lastname: White
authors.forename: Melanie E
authors.initials: ME
authors.lastname: Moses
authors.forename: S K Morgan
authors.initials: SK
authors.lastname: Ernest
authors.forename: Brian J
authors.initials: BJ
authors.lastname: Enquist
authors.forename: Eric L
authors.initials: EL
authors.lastname: Charnov
mesh_terms: D000704:Analysis of Variance; D000818:Animals; D005075:Biological Evolution; D049628:Body Size; D001835:Body Weight; D052284:Clutch Size; D006128:Growth; D008136:Longevity; D008433:Mathematics; D008954:Models, Biological; D012044:Regression Analysis; D012098:Reproduction; D012741:Sexual Maturation