Abstract
Selection acting on large marine vertebrates may be qualitatively different from that acting on terrestrial or freshwater organisms, but logistical constraints have thus far precluded selection estimates for the former. We overcame these constraints by exhaustively sampling and repeatedly recapturing individuals in six cohorts of juvenile lemon sharks (450 age-0 and 255 age-1 fish) at an enclosed nursery site (Bimini, Bahamas). Data on individual size, condition factor, growth rate and inter-annual survival were used to test the 'bigger is better', 'fatter is better' and 'faster is better' hypotheses of life-history theory. For age-0 sharks, selection on all measured traits was weak, and generally acted against large size and high condition. For age-1 sharks, selection was much stronger, and consistently acted against large size and fast growth. These results suggest that selective pressures at Bimini may be constraining the evolution of large size and fast growth, an observation that fits well with the observed small size and low growth rate of juveniles at this site. Our results support those of some other recent studies in suggesting that bigger/fatter/faster is not always better, and may often be worse.