Observed versus predicted number of breeding females.

<p>Observed and predicted number of breeding females summed across four hoary marmot social groups from the Ruby Range, Yukon, 2007–2009. Predictions were based on model-averaged breeding probability estimates derived from the same study site in 1999–2004, assuming one litter per breeding female per season. Predictions were rounded to the nearest whole number.</p><p>Observed versus predicted number of breeding females.</p

Model-averaging results for fecundity linear models.

<p>Model-averaged beta coefficients (β), bootstrapped unconditional standard errors (SE), 95% confidence interval lower and upper limits (LCL and UCL), and summed AIC weights (ω+) of parameters for models of group fecundity, individual fecundity (juveniles/adult female), and litter size of hoary marmots in the Ruby Range, Yukon Territory. SEs and 95% confidence limits were bootstrapped with 1000 replications. Except for litter size, analyses were based on data from 1999–2004 and 2007–2009. Due to highly significant poisson overdispersion, juveniles per group were modeled using negative binomial linear models. Juveniles per female were modeled using Poisson mixed models with social group random effects. Litter size data were approximately normally distributed, and were modeled as such. Only models that were within 7 AICc of the top model, and with smaller AICc values than an intercept-only (null) model were used for model averaging and for calculating AICc weights [<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0119081#pone.0119081.ref032" target="_blank">32</a>].</p><p>Model-averaging results for fecundity linear models.</p

Fecundity data Poisson overdispersion tests.

<p>Results of Poisson overdispersion tests [<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0119081#pone.0119081.ref044" target="_blank">44</a>] for three measures of hoary marmot fecundity, based on data from 10 hoary marmot social groups in the Ruby Range, Yukon Territory, 1999–2004 and 2007–2009. The corresponding linear model types used to model those variables are also shown. Error distributions were chosen based on test results. If significant overdispersion was present, negative binomial generalized linear models were used. If Poisson underdispersion was detected, Gaussian errors were used. Random effects (Social Group affiliation, and interaction between Social Group interaction and fixed effect slopes) were included based on likelihood-ratio tests using the most parameterized fixed-effect model in each model set [<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0119081#pone.0119081.ref045" target="_blank">45</a>].</p><p>Fecundity data Poisson overdispersion tests.</p

Current versus previous-year breeding states.

<p>Contingency table comparing current and previous-year breeding states for adult female hoary marmots in the Ruby Range, Yukon Territory. For both the current and previous year, N = nonbreeder and B = breeder. Each cell shows the total number of females with a specific two-year breeding history. Percentages by row are shown in parentheses (e.g. Top row: % of previous-year nonbreeders who were nonbreeders or breeders in the current year). Breeders and nonbreeders from the previous year were equally likely to breed in the current year (Fisher’s exact test, p = 0.55). Test results were also non-significant when calculated separately for each year 2000–2004.</p><p>Current versus previous-year breeding states.</p

Summed AIC weights for hoary marmot multi-state CMR analysis.

<p>AIC weights (ω+) are shown for all covariates summed across all candidate models in a multi-state CMR analysis of adult female hoary marmots in the Ruby Range, Yukon, 1999–2004. Covariates of both survival (S) and breeding probability (ψ) are shown. Covariate descriptions are in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0119081#pone.0119081.t001" target="_blank">Table 1</a>.</p><p>‘*’ indicates an interaction term between two main effects.</p><p>Summed AIC weights for hoary marmot multi-state CMR analysis.</p

Model-selection results for linear models of hoary marmot reproductive parameters.

<p>Model-selection results for multistate CMR analyses of adult female hoary marmot survival and breeding probability in the Ruby Range, Yukon Territory from 1999–2004. Mark-recapture data were used to model the joint probability of three parameters: Apparent survival probability (S), the probability of breeding in a given year (Ψ), and detection probability (p). p was always modeled as a constant, and was estimated at 0.96 ± 02 (SE). Models are described in terms of the covariates used to constrain S and Ψ. In some cases, Ψ was modeled differently for young (2 year old) and old (3+ years) marmots. Descriptions and abbreviations for all covariates are in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0119081#pone.0119081.t001" target="_blank">Table 1</a>. K is the number of estimated model parameters, AICc is the Akaike Information Criterion corrected for sample size, Δ AICc reflects the difference in AICc between each model and the top model (smallest AICc),and ω is the model’s AIC weight.</p><p>Model-selection results for linear models of hoary marmot reproductive parameters.</p

Model-averaged apparent survival probability.

<p>Apparent survival probability (S) was modeled for adult female hoary marmots in the Ruby Range, Yukon, between 1999 and 2004. Probabilities for breeding and non-breeding individuals are shown. Values are model-averaged parameter estimates ± 1 SE.</p

The Relationship between body condition and day of year for breeding and non-breeding female hoary marmots.

<p>We estimated the change over time in the body condition index (residuals from a linear regression of body mass as a function of zygomatic arch width) of non-breeding and breeding female hoary marmots in the Ruby Range, Yukon. Data from 1999–2004 are shown pooled across years. The best fit lines for linear regressions are shown. The slope of the relationship between body condition and Julian day was 0.02 (SE = 0.0016) for breeders and 0.028 (SE = 0.0015) for nonbreeders. The effects of day, breeding state, and day * breeding state interaction were all significant (p < 0.005) in a general linear model. Overall the model had an adjusted R² of 0.62.</p

Model-averaged breeding probability.

<p>Probability of breeding (Ψ) for adult female hoary marmots was modeled as a function of age, previous breeding state, and time. Results are based on 6 years of trapping data (1999–2004) for marmots from 10 social groups in a single valley in the Ruby Range, Yukon. Values are model-averaged annual parameter estimates ± 1 SE.</p

Abbreviations and descriptions of covariates used in analyses of female hoary marmot reproductive parameters.

<p>Abbreviations and descriptions of covariates used in analyses of female hoary marmot reproductive parameters.</p