Data from: Testing frameworks for early life effects: The developmental constraints and adaptive response hypotheses do not explain key fertility outcomes in wild female baboons

In evolutionary ecology, two classes of explanations are frequently
invoked to explain "early life effects" on adult outcomes.
Developmental constraints (DC) explanations contend that costs of early
adversity arise from limitations adversity places on optimal development.
Adaptive response (AR) hypotheses propose that later life outcomes will be
worse when early and adult environments are poorly "matched."
Here, we use recently proposed mathematical definitions for these
hypotheses and a quadratic-regression based approach to test the long-term
consequences of variation in developmental environments on fertility in
wild baboons. We evaluate whether low rainfall and/or dominance rank
during development predict three female fertility measures in adulthood,
and whether any observed relationships are consistent with DC and/or AR.
Neither rainfall during development nor the difference between rainfall in
development and adulthood predicted any fertility measures. Females who
were low-ranking during development had an elevated risk of losing infants
later in life, and greater change in rank between development and
adulthood predicted greater risk of infant loss. However, both effects
were statistically marginal and consistent with alternative explanations,
including adult environmental quality effects. Consequently, our data do
not provide compelling support for either of these common explanations for
the evolution of early life effects.