Antagonistic and Synergistic Interactions Among Predators
|
|
- Kerry Mosley
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Bulletin of Mathematical Biology : DOI /s ORIGINAL ARTICLE Antagonistic and Synergistic Interactions Among Predators Gary R. Huxel Department of Biological Sciences, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA Received: 28 April 2006 / Accepted: 7 March 2007 / Published online: 7 June 2007 Society for Mathematical Biology 2007 Abstract The structure and dynamics of food webs are largely dependent upon interactions among consumers and their resources. However, interspecific interactions such as intraguild predation and interference competition can also play a significant role in the stability of communities. The role of antagonistic/synergistic interactions among predators has been largely ignored in food web theory. These mechanisms influence predation rates, which is one of the key factors regulating food web structure and dynamics, thus ignoring them can potentially limit understanding of food webs. Using nonlinear models, it is shown that critical aspects of multiple predator food web dynamics are antagonistic/synergistic interactions among predators. The influence of antagonistic/synergistic interactions on coexistence of predators depended largely upon the parameter set used and the degree of feeding niche differentiation. In all cases when there was no effect of antagonism or synergism a ij = 1.00, the predators coexisted. Using the stable parameter set, coexistence occurred across the range of antagonism/synergism used. However, using the chaotic parameter strong antagonism resulted in the extinction of one or both species, while strong synergism tended to coexistence. Whereas using the limit cycle parameter set, coexistence was strongly dependent on the degree of feeding niche overlap. Additionally increasing the degree of feeding specialization of the predators on the two prey species increased the amount of parameter space in which coexistence of the two predators occurred. Bifurcation analyses supported the general pattern of increased stability when the predator interaction was synergistic and decreased stability when it was antagonistic. Thus, synergistic interactions should be more common than antagonistic interactions in ecological systems. Keywords Synergistic and antagonistic interactions Predator predator interactions Food webs Trait-mediated effects 1. Introduction Interspecific interactions among predators are known to influence the structure and stability of food webs Elton, 1958; May, 1973; Polis et al., Predator predator interactions can influence the total predation rate of a community of predators resulting in address: ghuxel@uark.edu.
2 2094 G.R. Huxel cascading effects on prey populations Sih et al., 1985, 1998; Wilbur and Fauth, 1990; Polis and Holt, 1992; Schroeder, Several outcomes are possible given predator predator interactions: 1 the predators can act synergistically resulting in greater than expected rates of predation if considering each predator independently synergism; 2 total mortality is equivalent to the expected value additive mortality; and 3 total mortality is less than expected nonadditive mortality. Nonadditive mortality can arise from several different mechanisms including intraguild predation, interspecific competition, and antagonistic predator predator interactions. The first two have been drawn significant attention in theoretical and empirical studies, but the last has been largely ignored. This is mainly due to the problem of distinguishing among these interactions. In antagonistic interactions, reduced capture rates can arise due to behavioral changes in the prey in response to one or more predators Sih et al., 1985, 1998; Bjorkman and Liman, This may also arise in cases where predators avoid one another through fine scale habitat selection or to lower risk of intraguild predation. The effect of microscale habitat selection is not addressed here. Synergism occurs when these interactions result in increased prey capture rates relative to when only one predator species is present. The attempt by prey to flee one predator may actually result in greater predation risk from a second predator McPeek, For example, the response of mayflies to predatory stoneflies is to move into the water column where risk of predation by trout is increased Cowan and Peckarsky, Thus, both antagonism and synergism directly influence the predators and their prey species through prey capture rates. Antagonism has a negative effect on predator population growth and a positive affect on prey population growth, while synergism has the opposite effect. Further, indirect effects due to antagonism and synergism can potentially dominate the dynamics of the food web Wootton, 1994; Polis and Strong, Simulations and bifurcation analyses are used to explore the overall influence of antagonism and synergism on food web stability. Given that predators influence directly or indirectly the ability of others to capture prey, what are the consequences of antagonistic and synergistic interactions? Do their interactions increase or decrease stability in terms of coexistence of the predators and stability of population dynamics? It is expected that synergistic interactions will result in more efficient predation, thus lowering prey densities. If the prey species can persist, then the long-term effect would be to lower predator growth rates stabilizing the food web, however if the prey become extinct so will the predator. If predation rates are too high, prey populations followed by predator populations will become extinct. Similarly, if the interactions are antagonistic, then predator growth rates are predicted to be decreased due to lower per capita predation rates. This may allow for increased prey densities. Coexistence of the predators may occur even if antagonism greatly reduced per capita capture rates given sufficiently large prey populations. However, increased prey densities may result in resource depletion and coupled with increased predation with a lagged response with predators slowly tracking prey densities may result in strong oscillations in prey and predator densities with either one or the other becoming extinct. While the focus of this work is on predator predator interactions, prey species may respond to predators through morphological, behavioral, or life-history traits. These traitmediated interactions have been shown to strongly influence food web dynamics including the strength of trophic cascades Schmitz et al., 2004; Bolker et al., Thus, while
3 Antagonistic and Synergistic Interactions Among Predators 2095 trait-mediated interactions are not directly addressed, they are will influence whether antagonistic/synergistic interactions occur and the strength of those interactions. Using a five species food web model, direct and indirect effects of antagonistic/synergistic interactions on food web stability was investigated. In particular, the interactions predator-prey interaction strengths, diet overlap and antagonistic/synergistic interactions and their influences on predator coexistence and population dynamics were examined using simulations and bifurcation analyses of a tritrophic model system. 2. Methods 2.1. Model systems The basic model structure is based upon previous studies of a well-known set of predatorprey equations Hastings and Powell, 1991; Yodzis and Innes, 1992; McCann et al., 1998; Huxel and McCann, 1998; Huxel et al., The Yodzis and Innes 1992 parameterization of the Hastings and Powell 1991 tritrophic food chain model was the starting point of all model systems and is given below: dr = R 1 R HR x H y H, dt K R + R 0 dh HR = x H H + x H y H, dt R + R 0 where consumer-resource interactions exhibit Type II functional responses; R is the resource species; K is the carrying capacity of R; H is the consumer; R 0 is the half saturation point for the functional response between the consumer and resource levels; x i is the metabolic rate of trophic level i, measured relative to the production-to-biomass ratio of the resource density; y i is a measure of the ingestion rate per unit metabolic rate of the resource by i. This basic model can exhibit a wide range of dynamics from chaos to limit cycles to stable points depending upon the parameter set used Yodzis and Innes, 1992; McCann and Yodzis, Given this range of dynamics, various theoretical studies have explored factors that can stabilize the dynamics of food webs using this basic model to represent predator-prey interactions for example: McCann and Hastings, 1997; McCann et al., 1998; Huxel and McCann, This work expands on those studies by examining the influence of antagonistic/synergistic interactions among predators of food webs in which the predator-prey interactions are based upon equations in 1. Increasing food web complexity via the addition of a second prey can increase stability of the food web given that the new predator-prey interactions are weak to moderate in strength McCann et al., Thus, a model with two prey and two predators was examined to determine whether the influence of antagonistic/synergistic interactions changes with food web structure. With multiple prey, specialization on a particular prey species becomes possible and can reduce resource competition without influencing the antagonistic/synergistic interactions. To examine the potential influence of specialization on 1
4 2096 G.R. Huxel the impact of antagonistic/synergistic interactions on food web stability a system of five species, now with two prey species, is utilized. This system is given by: dr = R 1 R RH1 RH2 x c y c x c y c, dt K R + R 0 R + R 0 dh 1 RH1 H 1 P 1 = x c H 1 + x c y c α 45 ω 24 x p y p dt R + R 0 ω 24 H 1 + ω 34 H 2 + H 0 H 1 P 2 α 54 ω 25 x p y p, ω 25 H 1 + ω 35 H 2 + H 0 dh 2 RH2 H 2 P 1 = x c H 2 + x c y c α 45 ω 34 x p y p dt R + R 0 ω 24 H 1 + ω 34 H 2 + H 0 H 2 P 2 α 54 ω 35 x p y p, 2 ω 25 H 1 + ω 35 H 2 + H 0 dp 1 H 1 P 1 = x p P 1 + α 45 ω 24 x p y p dt ω 24 H 1 + ω 34 H 2 + H 0 H 2 P 1 + α 45 ω 34 x p y p, ω 24 H 1 + ω 34 H 2 + H 0 dp 2 H 1 P 2 = x p P 2 + α 54 ω 25 x p y p dt ω 25 H 1 + ω 35 H 2 + H 0 H 2 P 2 + α 54 ω 35 x p y p, ω 25 H 1 + ω 35 H 2 + H 0 where ω ij s are the preference coefficients indicating the degree of specialization for prey i by predator j.theω ij s sum to 1.0 for each predator e.g. ω 25 + ω 25 = 1. By varying the ω ij s the amount of diet overlap can be controlled. Analytical analysis of the stability of this system is complex, so numerical simulations of the model systems were used to explore the influence of antagonism/synergism on stability of the above food web 2. The a ij s are not density dependent in this formulation. This is for two reasons, one is mathematical simplicity and the other is to reflect the biology of prey responses to density independent cues. In future studies, the density dependence of the antagonistic/synergistic response should be addressed Simulation methods The effect of interactions among multiple predators and their prey maybe confounded by increased density when a second predator is introduced. In order to minimize this effect, total initial densities of predators were kept constant so that each predator in a two predator system had an initial density of half the predator in a one predator system. Parameter values used in the simulations were chosen so that each predator-prey pair individually displayed either chaotic dynamics: x H = 0.4, y H = 2.009, R 0 = , x P = 0.08, y P = 5, H 0 = 0.5; stable dynamics x H = 0.4, y H = 2.009, R 0 = 0.5, x P = 0.01, y P = 5, H 0 = 1.5; or a limit cycle x H = 0.4, y H = 2.009, R 0 = , x P = 0.5, y P = 5, H 0 = 0.5 Yodzis and Innes, 1992; McCann and Yodzis, 1994; Huxel and McCann, Simulations were performed over a range of antagonistic/synergistic coefficients
5 Antagonistic and Synergistic Interactions Among Predators 2097 from weak antagonism α ij s = 0.50 to no antagonism/synergism α ij s = 1.00 to strong synergism a ij s = In the two prey model simulations, simulations were performed for generalist predators ω ij s = 0.50 and specialist predators ω ij s = 0.90 for the primary prey and ω ij s = 0.10 for the secondary prey but each predator specialized on a different prey. All simulations were performed for 1,000 time steps to examine the influence of antagonism/synergism on stability in terms of population dynamics of predators and prey Bifurcation analyses Bifurcation analyses were performed setting the α ij s of the two predators equal over the range of 0.50 to 1.50 so that these analyses were performed on cased of symmetric interactions. Analyses were done for both generalist predators and specialist predators. The minima and maxima densities are taken over a 500 time step period after an initial 500 time steps. 3. Results 3.1. Antagonism/synergism Coexistence of predators was greatly influenced by the level of antagonism/synergism, degree of diet specialization, and the parameter set used Figs. 1, 2. For the chaotic parameter set, the degree of diet specialization interacted with the strength of the antagonism/synergism to produced distinct patterns of coexistence Fig. 1. Neither predator persisted under antagonistic interactions a ij s < For generalist predators, coexistence only occurred under conditions when the a ij s were synergism and both were relatively large Fig. 1A. For specialist predators the results were more variable in part due to the chaotic dynamics resulting in some predator populations becoming extinct due to low population numbers. But, again persistence and coexistence occurred only under synergistic conditions Fig. 1B. Neither predator persisted in both the generalist and specialist simulations at the null value of a ij s = 1.00 no effect of antagonism or synergism. For the limit cycle parameter set Fig. 2, there were significant differences in coexistence between the generalist and specialist simulations. For generalist predators, coexistence occurred only when the antagonism/synergism coefficients where symmetrical Fig. 2A. For specialist predators, coexistence was much more likely and occurred a large range of a ij values Fig. 2B. The predators coexisted in both the generalist and specialist simulations at the null value of a ij s = For the stable parameter set, coexistence occurred over all of the antagonism/synergism parameter space. This allows for an examination of another factor of stability minimum population size under conditions when coexistence always occurred asking whether minimum population size increase with antagonism, synergism or both? 3.2. Bifurcation analyses The bifurcation plots for the chaotic parameter set show that both the minima and maxima densities sharply increase at α ij = 1.14 Fig. 3. As the α ij s increase above this value,
6 2098 G.R. Huxel A B Fig. 1 Regions of extinction and coexistence in the two prey two predator antagonism/synergism model simulations using the chaotic parameter set. α ij s are the antagonism/synergism coefficients. A Generalist predators each predator has a 0.50 preference for each prey species. B Specialist predators each predator has a 0.90 preference for different prey species. Dark blue designates extinction of both predators; light blue = predator 2 only; yellow = predator 1 only; and red = coexistence of both predators.
7 Antagonistic and Synergistic Interactions Among Predators 2099 A B Fig. 2 Regions of extinction and coexistence in the two prey two predator antagonism/synergism model simulations using the limit cycle parameter set. α ij s are the antagonism/synergism coefficients. A Generalist predators. B Specialist predators. Color scheme same as in Fig. 1.
8 2100 G.R. Huxel A B Fig. 3 Bifurcation chaotic parameter set. A General predators. B Specialist predators. the minima and maxima slightly decrease. The pattern was similar for both the generalist and specialist analyses. The dynamics also undergo a shift moving from chaotic dynamics when coexistence does not occur to a limit cycle when coexistence does occur. For the limit cycle parameter set, coexistence occurs under relatively strong antagonistic interactions a ij = 0.56 Fig. 4. From that point to a ij = 0.84 a stable equilibrium is exhibit with a slight decrease. Above a ij = 0.84 the system moves into a limit cycle with the maxima increase and the minima decrease with a ij. The generalist and specialist are similar, except at high a ij s when in the specialist analyses the system moves into a chaotic regime Fig. 4B. For the stable parameter set, coexistence at a stable equilibrium occurred for all values of a ij Fig. 5. The minimum and maximum values however are very low until a ij > 1. The population size exhibits a shift first at a ij = 1.00 and then increased rapidly above
9 Antagonistic and Synergistic Interactions Among Predators 2101 A B Fig. 4 Bifurcation limit cycle parameter set. A General predators. B Specialist predators. a ij 1.20 suggesting that synergism has a strong stabilizing effect. The pattern is similar for both the generalist and specialist predators. 4. Discussion Predator predator interactions can play a strong role in structuring food webs. The interactions among multiple predators can produce predation rates that deviate from the expected additive effect of their individual impacts on either prey Sih et al., The effect can be positive antagonistic predator interactions or negative synergistic predator interactions on prey populations. However, indirect effects can cascade through the food web and can potentially have a stronger effect that direct effects Wootton, 1994;
10 2102 G.R. Huxel A B Fig. 5 Bifurcation stable parameter set. A General predators. B Specialist predators. Polis and Strong, Thus, predicting the net outcome of antagonistic/synergistic interactions on predator populations can be difficult, but it has important consequences for management of both predator and prey populations. The results demonstrate that coexistence of the two predators occurs mostly under conditions of synergistic interactions; however, the degree of coexistence varies with parameter set, diet overlap, and the strength of the antagonistic/synergistic interactions. Using the two oscillating parameter sets chaotic and limit cycle, antagonistic interactions resulted in increased prey populations, however, the prey populations would crash due to resource depletion and a lagged response of predators to prey densities. This would strongly drive down the prey populations and either the prey and predators or the predators would become extinct as a result similar to the dynamics of a strongly oscillating Lotka Volterra predator-prey model. With synergistic interactions, prey densities are lower but preda-
11 Antagonistic and Synergistic Interactions Among Predators 2103 tors are more effective resulting in more stable dynamics as exhibited in the bifurcation diagrams Figs. 3, 4. Minimum densities increased sharply as the a ij s moved towards and into values indicative of synergism. Using the stable parameter set, the equilibrium densities increased with a ij suggesting a strong stabilizing effect Fig. 5. The results also depended upon the degree of diet overlap of the predators. In the generalist case, diets were the same. In the oscillating parameter sets, diet overlap decreased stability whereas diet separation increased stability as would be expected Wilson and Yoshimura, 1994; Abrams, However, the bifurcation diagram for the limit cycle parameter set showed some unexpected results. In the specialist case, as synergistic interactions increased above a ij = 1.33, the system moved into a chaotic regime with large oscillations Fig. 4B. This did not occur in the generalist case. Thus this study, synergistic interactions actually increased coexistence and stability via reducing prey populations, thereby slowing the overall dynamics of the system. Stability as measured by coexistence and minimum population size increased with synergism strength. It appears that as predator populations increased prey populations decreased, followed by a decrease in predator populations. At low predator and prey populations the synergistic interactions allowed them to maintain positive but low growth rates. This allows for increased densities of the basal species and high reproductive rates of the prey most of which were then predated. These results also suggest that strong antagonistic interactions should be relatively rare or have some mechanism such as fine scale habitat separation or reduced diet overlap to minimize the antagonistic interaction. Another outcome is that if prey capture rates become too low, one predator may switch to feeding upon another predator resulting in intraguild predation or cannibalism. A major assumption of intraguild predation is that the intraguild prey the intermediate predator is more easily captured by the intraguild predator top predator than the shared prey species. Thus, one would expect that purely antagonistic interactions will be rare in nature relative to purely synergistic interactions and that intraguild predation should arise when predators negatively influence prey capture rates of other predators. The influence on prey and basal resource populations and the strength of trophic cascades will depend strongly on whether predator predator interactions are synergistic or antagonistic including intraguild predation. The role of trait-mediated interactions in determining whether antagonistic or synergistic interactions will also need to be further explored. Schmitz et al have shown that trait-mediated interactions are common in ecological systems and thus it is expected that antagonistic/synergistic interactions that may arise from those interactions may play an important role in food web structure and dynamics. Acknowledgements I thank Matt Dekar, Drew Talley, and various anonymous reviewers for comments that improved this paper. This paper was supported in parts by grants DEB and BE: CBC from the National Science Foundation. References Abrams, P.A., The adaptive dynamics of consumer choice. Am. Nat. 153, Bjorkman, C., Liman, A.S., Foraging behaviour influences the outcome of predator predator interactions. Ecol. Entomol. 30,
12 2104 G.R. Huxel Bolker, B., Holyoak, M.A., Krivan, V., Rowe, L., Schmitz, O., Connecting theoretical and empirical studies of trait-mediated interactions. Ecology 84, Cowan, C.A., Peckarsky, B.L., Diel feeding and positioning periodicity of a grazing mayfly in a trout stream and a fishless stream. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 51, Elton, C.S., The Ecology of Invasions by Animals and Plants. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Hastings, A., Powell, T., Chaos in a three species food chain model. Ecology 72, Huxel, G.R., McCann, K., Food web stability: the influence of trophic flows across habitats. Am. Nat. 152, Huxel, G.R., McCann, K., Polis, G.A., The effect of partitioning of allochthonous and autochthonous resources on food web stability. Ecol. Res. 17, May, R.M., Stability and complexity in model ecosystems. Princeton University Press, Princeton. McCann, K., Hastings, A., Re-evaluating the omnivory-stability relationship in food webs. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B 264, McCann, K., Hastings, A., Huxel, G.R., Weak trophic interactions and the balance of nature. Nature 395, McCann, K., Yodzis, P., Nonlinear dynamics and population disappearances. Am. Nat. 144, McPeek, M.A., Behavioral differences between Enallagma species Odonata influencing differential vulnerability to predators. Ecology 71, Polis, G.A., Holt, R.D., Intraguild predation: the dynamics of complex trophic interactions. TREE 7, Polis, G.A., Myers, C.A., Holt, R.D., The ecology and evolution of intraguild predation: potential competitors that eat each other. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 20, Polis, G.A., Strong, D.R., Food web complexity and community dynamics. Am. Nat. 147, Schmitz, O.J., Krivan, V., Ovadia, O., Trophic cascades: the primacy of trait-mediated indirect interactions. Ecol. Lett. 7, Schroeder, L.M., Interactions between the predators Thanasimus formicarius Col: Cleridae and Rhizophagus depressus Col: Rhizophagidae, and the bark beetle Tomicus piniperda Col: Scolytidae. Entomophaga 41, Sih, A., Crowley, P., McPeek, M., Petranka, J., Strohmeier, K., Predation, competition, and prey communities: A review of field experiments. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 16, Sih, A., Englund, G., Woorster, D., Emergent impacts of multiple predators on prey. TREE 13, Wilbur, H.M., Fauth, J.E., Experimental aquatic food webs: interactions between two predators and two prey. Am. Nat. 135, Wilson, D.S., Yoshimura, J., On the coexistence of specialists and generalists. Am. Nat. 144, Wootton, J.T., The nature and consequences of indirect effects in ecological communities. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 25, Yodzis, P., Innes, S., Body-size and consumer-resource dynamics. Am. Nat. 139,
Stabilization of chaotic and non-permanent food-web dynamics
Eur. Phys. J. B 38, 297 303 (2004) DOI: 10.1140/epjb/e2004-00122-1 THE EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL B Stabilization of chaotic and non-permanent food-web dynamics R.J. Williams and N.D. Martinez a Pacific
More informationSummary. A Bird s- Eye View of Community and Population Effects of Ontogenetic Development
Chapter one Summary A Bird s- Eye View of Community and Population Effects of Ontogenetic Development Why start with summarizing the contents of a book? In the present case we see at least two good reasons.
More informationGary G. Mittelbach Michigan State University
Community Ecology Gary G. Mittelbach Michigan State University Sinauer Associates, Inc. Publishers Sunderland, Massachusetts U.S.A. Brief Table of Contents 1 Community Ecology s Roots 1 PART I The Big
More informationBIOL 410 Population and Community Ecology. Predation
BIOL 410 Population and Community Ecology Predation Intraguild Predation Occurs when one species not only competes with its heterospecific guild member, but also occasionally preys upon it Species 1 Competitor
More informationThe Structure of Ecological Networks and Consequences for Fragility
The Structure of Ecological Networks and Consequences for Fragility closely connected clustered Emily I. Jones ECOL 596H Feb. 13, 2008 Why ecological network structure matters 2. 3. the network contains
More informationHydra Effects in Stable Communities and Their Implications for System Dynamics
Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU Mathematics and Statistics Faculty Publications Mathematics and Statistics 5-216 Hydra Effects in Stable Communities and Their Implications for System Dynamics
More informationParameter Sensitivity In A Lattice Ecosystem With Intraguild Predation
Parameter Sensitivity In A Lattice Ecosystem With Intraguild Predation N. Nakagiri a, K. Tainaka a, T. Togashi b, T. Miyazaki b and J. Yoshimura a a Department of Systems Engineering, Shizuoka University,
More informationMeasuring the population-level consequences of predator-induced prey movement
Evolutionary Ecology Research, 2008, 10: 333 350 Measuring the population-level consequences of predator-induced prey movement Peter A. Abrams* Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Zoology Building,
More informationDo short-term behavioural responses of consumers in tri-trophic food chains persist at the population time-scale?
Evolutionary Ecology Research, 2004, 6: 1063 1081 Do short-term behavioural responses of consumers in tri-trophic food chains persist at the population time-scale? Vlastimil Křivan 1 * and Etienne Sirot
More informationField experiments on competition. Field experiments on competition. Field experiments on competition
INTERACTIONS BETWEEN SPECIES Type of interaction species 1 species 2 competition consumer-resource (pred, herb, para) mutualism detritivore-detritus (food is dead) Field experiments on competition Example
More informationAge (x) nx lx. Population dynamics Population size through time should be predictable N t+1 = N t + B + I - D - E
Population dynamics Population size through time should be predictable N t+1 = N t + B + I - D - E Time 1 N = 100 20 births 25 deaths 10 immigrants 15 emmigrants Time 2 100 + 20 +10 25 15 = 90 Life History
More informationInterspecific Competition
Interspecific Competition Intraspecific competition Classic logistic model Interspecific extension of densitydependence Individuals of other species may also have an effect on per capita birth & death
More informationCh20_Ecology, community & ecosystems
Community Ecology Populations of different species living in the same place NICHE The sum of all the different use of abiotic resources in the habitat by s given species what the organism does what is
More informationThe influence of vigilance on intraguild predation
Journal of Theoretical Biology 249 (2007) 218 234 www.elsevier.com/locate/yjtbi The influence of vigilance on intraguild predation Tristan Kimbrell a,, Robert D. Holt a, Per Lundberg b a Department of
More informationNiche The sum of all interactions a species has with biotic/abiotic components of the environment N-dimensional hypervolume
Niche The sum of all interactions a species has with biotic/abiotic components of the environment N-dimensional hypervolume Each dimension is a biotic or abiotic resource Ecomorphology Ecology (niche)
More informationCh.5 Evolution and Community Ecology How do organisms become so well suited to their environment? Evolution and Natural Selection
Ch.5 Evolution and Community Ecology How do organisms become so well suited to their environment? Evolution and Natural Selection Gene: A sequence of DNA that codes for a particular trait Gene pool: All
More informationEvidence for Competition
Evidence for Competition Population growth in laboratory experiments carried out by the Russian scientist Gause on growth rates in two different yeast species Each of the species has the same food e.g.,
More informationChapter 6 Reading Questions
Chapter 6 Reading Questions 1. Fill in 5 key events in the re-establishment of the New England forest in the Opening Story: 1. Farmers begin leaving 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Broadleaf forest reestablished 2.
More informationAggregations on larger scales. Metapopulation. Definition: A group of interconnected subpopulations Sources and Sinks
Aggregations on larger scales. Metapopulation Definition: A group of interconnected subpopulations Sources and Sinks Metapopulation - interconnected group of subpopulations sink source McKillup and McKillup
More informationA spatial theory for emergent multiple predator prey interactions in food webs
Received: 11 April 2017 Revised: 7 June 2017 Accepted: 25 June 2017 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.3250 ORIGINAL RESEARCH A spatial theory for emergent multiple predatorprey interactions in food webs Tobin D. Northfield
More informationIt has become increasingly evident that nonlinear phenomena
Increased competition may promote species coexistence J. Vandermeer*, M. A. Evans*, P. Foster*, T. Höök, M. Reiskind*, and M. Wund* *Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, and School of Natural
More informationExam 3. Principles of Ecology. April 14, Name
Exam 3. Principles of Ecology. April 14, 2010. Name Directions: Perform beyond your abilities. There are 100 possible points (+ 9 extra credit pts) t N t = N o N t = N o e rt N t+1 = N t + r o N t (1-N
More informationChapter 54: Community Ecology
AP Biology Guided Reading Name Chapter 54: Community Ecology Overview 1. What does community ecology explore? Concept 54.1 Community interactions are classified by whether they help, harm, or have no effect
More informationD. Correct! Allelopathy is a form of interference competition in plants. Therefore this answer is correct.
Ecology Problem Drill 18: Competition in Ecology Question No. 1 of 10 Question 1. The concept of allelopathy focuses on which of the following: (A) Carrying capacity (B) Limiting resource (C) Law of the
More informationThe implications of adaptive prey behaviour for ecological communities: a review of current theory
CHAPTER EIGHT The implications of adaptive prey behaviour for ecological communities: a review of current theory SCOTT D. PEACOR Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University and CLAYTON
More informationOn the stabilizing effect of specialist predators on founder-controlled communities
On the stabilizing effect of specialist predators on founder-controlled communities Sebastian J. Schreiber Department of Mathematics Western Washington University Bellingham, WA 98225 May 2, 2003 Appeared
More informationResilience and stability of ecological networks. Elisa Thébault
Resilience and stability of ecological networks Elisa Thébault elisa.thebault@upmc.fr Why study ecological interaction webs? Why study ecological interaction webs? Network structural patterns Factors which
More informationInteractions between predators and prey
Interactions between predators and prey What is a predator? Predator An organism that consumes other organisms and inevitably kills them. Predators attack and kill many different prey individuals over
More informationDynamics Analysis of Anti-predator Model on Intermediate Predator With Ratio Dependent Functional Responses
Journal of Physics: Conference Series PAPER OPEN ACCESS Dynamics Analysis of Anti-predator Model on Intermediate Predator With Ratio Dependent Functional Responses To cite this article: D Savitri 2018
More informationChapter 54: Community Ecology
Name Period Concept 54.1 Community interactions are classified by whether they help, harm, or have no effect on the species involved. 1. What is a community? List six organisms that would be found in your
More informationON THE INTERPLAY OF PREDATOR SWITCHING AND PREY EVASION IN DETERMINING THE STABILITY OF PREDATOR PREY DYNAMICS
ISRAEL JOURNAL OF ZOOLOGY, Vol. 50, 2004, pp. 187 205 ON THE INTERPLAY OF PREDATOR SWITCHING AND PREY EVASION IN DETERMINING THE STABILITY OF PREDATOR PREY DYNAMICS TRISTAN KIMBRELL* AND ROBERT D. HOLT
More informationHOW DEPENDENT ARE SPECIES-PAIR INTERACTION STRENGTHS ON OTHER SPECIES IN THE FOOD WEB?
Ecology, 85(10), 2004, pp. 2754 2763 2004 by the Ecological Society of America HOW DEPENDENT ARE SPECIES-PAIR INTERACTION STRENGTHS ON OTHER SPECIES IN THE FOOD WEB? SCOTT D. PEACOR 1,3 AND EARL E. WERNER
More informationPollinator foraging adaptation and coexistence of competing plants
Pollinator foraging adaptation and coexistence of competing plants Tomás A. Revilla 1 and Vlastimil Křivan 1,2 arxiv:162.2569v3 [q-bio.pe] 1 Aug 216 1 Institute of Entomology, Biology Center, Czech Academy
More informationOptimal foraging and predator prey dynamics III
Theoretical Population Biology 63 (003) 69 79 http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ytpbi Optimal foraging and predator prey dynamics III Vlastimil Krˇ ivan and Jan Eisner Department of Theoretical Biology, Institute
More informationCommunity and Population Ecology Populations & Communities Species Diversity Sustainability and Environmental Change Richness and Sustainability
1 2 3 4 Community and Population Ecology Chapter 6 Populations & Communities Biosphere> ecosystems> communities> populations> individuals A population is all of the individuals of the same species in a
More informationNICHE BREADTH AND RESOURCE PARTIONING
22 NICHE BREADTH AND RESOURCE PARTIONING Objectives Compute niche breadth for two organisms coexisting in a community. Compute niche overlap for the two coexisting organisms. Use the Solver function to
More informationCompetition. Not until we reach the extreme confines of life, in the arctic regions or on the borders of an utter desert, will competition cease
Competition Not until we reach the extreme confines of life, in the arctic regions or on the borders of an utter desert, will competition cease Darwin 1859 Origin of Species Competition A mutually negative
More information4. Ecology and Population Biology
4. Ecology and Population Biology 4.1 Ecology and The Energy Cycle 4.2 Ecological Cycles 4.3 Population Growth and Models 4.4 Population Growth and Limiting Factors 4.5 Community Structure and Biogeography
More informationThis article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research and
This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution
More informationEffects of partitioning allochthonous and autochthonous resources on food web stability
Blackell Science, LtdOxford, UK ERE Ecological Research 0912-8142002 Ecological Society of Japan 174July 2002 501 Resource partitioning and food eb stability G. R. Huxel et al. 10.1046/j.0912-814.2002.00501.x
More informationThe effect of emigration and immigration on the dynamics of a discrete-generation population
J. Biosci., Vol. 20. Number 3, June 1995, pp 397 407. Printed in India. The effect of emigration and immigration on the dynamics of a discrete-generation population G D RUXTON Biomathematics and Statistics
More informationREVISION: POPULATION ECOLOGY 18 SEPTEMBER 2013
REVISION: POPULATION ECOLOGY 18 SEPTEMBER 2013 Lesson Description In this lesson we: Revise population ecology by working through some exam questions. Key Concepts Definition of Population A population
More informationBIO S380T Page 1 Summer 2005: Exam 2
BIO S380T Page 1 Part I: Definitions. [5 points for each term] For each term, provide a brief definition that also indicates why the term is important in ecology or evolutionary biology. Where I ve provided
More informationEffect of Species 2 on Species 1 Competition - - Predator-Prey + - Parasite-Host + -
Community Ecology Community - a group of organisms, of different species, living in the same area Community ecology is the study of the interactions between species The presence of one species may affect
More informationCommunity Ecology. Classification of types of interspecific interactions: Effect of Species 1 on Species 2
Community Ecology Community - a group of organisms, of different species, living in the same area Community ecology is the study of the interactions between species The presence of one species may affect
More informationFrom simple rules to cycling in community assembly
OIKOS 105: 349/358, 2004 From simple rules to cycling in community assembly Sebastian J. Schreiber and Seth Rittenhouse Schreiber, S. J. and Rittenhouse, S. 2004. From simple rules to cycling in community
More informationb h c a,f b,e,h a Graph(s): A. the prey has a refuge from predators at low prey densities:
7. Match the predator-prey isoclines (on the next page) with a biological mechanism that could explain them (put the letter of the appropriate graph next to its description below). Some graphs will be
More informationREPORTS MORE HARM THAN GOOD: WHEN INVADER VULNERABILITY TO PREDATORS ENHANCES IMPACT ON NATIVE SPECIES
REPORTS Ecology, 86(10), 2005, pp. 2555 2560 2005 by the Ecological Society of America MORE HARM THAN GOOD: WHEN INVADER VULNERABILITY TO PREDATORS ENHANCES IMPACT ON NATIVE SPECIES ERIK G. NOONBURG 1,3
More informationNatal versus breeding dispersal: Evolution in a model system
Evolutionary Ecology Research, 1999, 1: 911 921 Natal versus breeding dispersal: Evolution in a model system Karin Johst 1 * and Roland Brandl 2 1 Centre for Environmental Research Leipzig-Halle Ltd, Department
More informationEcology- The study of the interractions of organisms with their physical environment and with each other and of the results of such interactions.
Topic 4: Ecology ---------- 4.1 communities and ecosystems ---------- Ecology- The study of the interractions of organisms with their physical environment and with each other and of the results of such
More informationBifurcations in Delayed Lotka-Volterra Intraguild Predation Model
MATIMYÁS MATEMATIKA Journal of the Mathematical Society of the Philippines ISSN 5-696 Vol. 37 Nos. - (4) pp. - Bifurcations in Delayed Lotka-Volterra Intraguild Predation Model Juancho A. Collera Department
More informationHistory and meaning of the word Ecology A. Definition 1. Oikos, ology - the study of the house - the place we live
History and meaning of the word Ecology. Definition 1. Oikos, ology - the study of the house - the place we live. Etymology - origin and development of the the word 1. Earliest - Haeckel (1869) - comprehensive
More informationPredation. Predation & Herbivory. Lotka-Volterra. Predation rate. Total rate of predation. Predator population 10/23/2013. Review types of predation
Predation & Herbivory Chapter 14 Predation Review types of predation Carnivory Parasitism Parasitoidism Cannabalism Lotka-Volterra Predators control prey populations and prey control predator populations
More informationHalf Hollow Hills High School AP Biology
Chapter 53 Community Ecology Essential questions What factors structure a community? What species & how many are present in a community? In what way do the populations interact? What roles do species play
More informationInterspecific Patterns. Interference vs. exploitative
Types of Competition Interference vs. exploitative Intraspecific vs. Interspeific Asymmetric vs. Symmetric Interspecific Patterns When two similar species coexist, there are three outcomes: Competitive
More informationThe Ideal Free Distribution: from hypotheses to tests
The Ideal Free Distribution: from hypotheses to tests Vlastimil Krivan Biology Center and Faculty of Science Ceske Budejovice Czech Republic vlastimil.krivan@gmail.com www.entu.cas.cz/krivan Talk outline
More informationExamples Functional Response Numerical Response Simple predator prey models Complex interactions
Definitions Examples Functional Response Numerical Response Predation Simple predator prey models Complex interactions trophic cascades hyperpredation and subsidies indirect effects (the ecology of ff
More informationPREDATORS REDUCE PREY POPULATION GROWTH BY INDUCING CHANGES IN PREY BEHAVIOR
Ecology, 85(7), 2004, pp. 1853 1858 2004 by the Ecological Society of America PREDATORS REDUCE PREY POPULATION GROWTH BY INDUCING CHANGES IN PREY BEHAVIOR ERIK H. NELSON, 1 CHRISTOPHER E. MATTHEWS, AND
More information6 TH. Most Species Compete with One Another for Certain Resources. Species Interact in Five Major Ways. Some Species Evolve Ways to Share Resources
Endangered species: Southern Sea Otter MILLER/SPOOLMAN ESSENTIALS OF ECOLOGY 6 TH Chapter 5 Biodiversity, Species Interactions, and Population Control Fig. 5-1a, p. 104 Species Interact in Five Major Ways
More informationIG predator. IG prey. Resource SYNTHESIZING INTRAGUILD PREDATION THEORY AND DATA. Short title: Intraguild Predation
Short title: Intraguild Predation SYNTHESIZING INTRAGUILD PREDATION THEORY AND DATA Name/contact: Elizabeth Borer Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Marine Biology University of California Santa Barbara,
More informationPREDATOR AND PREY HABITAT SELECTION GAMES: THE EFFECTS OF HOW PREY BALANCE FORAGING AND PREDATION RISK
ISRAEL JOURNAL OF ZOOLOGY, Vol. 50, 2004, pp. 233 254 PREDATOR AND PREY HABITAT SELECTION GAMES: THE EFFECTS OF HOW PREY BALANCE FORAGING AND PREDATION RISK BARNEY LUTTBEG* AND ANDREW SIH Department of
More informationBIOS 6150: Ecology Dr. Stephen Malcolm, Department of Biological Sciences
BIOS 6150: Ecology Dr. Stephen Malcolm, Department of Biological Sciences Week 7: Dynamics of Predation. Lecture summary: Categories of predation. Linked prey-predator cycles. Lotka-Volterra model. Density-dependence.
More informationGHS S.4 BIOLOGY TEST 2 APRIL Answer all the questions in Section A and B. in the spaces provided
GHS S.4 BIOLOGY TEST 2 APRIL 2016 TIME: 1 HOUR Instructions: Answer all the questions in Section A and B. in the spaces provided ANSERS TO SECTION A 1 6 11 16 21 26 2 7 12 17 22 27 3 8 13 18 23 28 4 9
More informationMultiple choice 2 pts each): x 2 = 18) Essay (pre-prepared) / 15 points. 19) Short Answer: / 2 points. 20) Short Answer / 5 points
P 1 Biology 217: Ecology Second Exam Fall 2004 There should be 7 ps in this exam - take a moment and count them now. Put your name on the first p of the exam, and on each of the ps with short answer questions.
More informationIt has long been recognized that the effects of a predator can
The contribution of trait-mediated indirect effects to the net effects of a predator Scott D. Peacor* and Earl E. Werner Department of Biology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Communicated
More informationPart 2: Models of Food-Web Structure
Part 2: Models of Food-Web Structure Stochastic models of food-web structure -Two Parameters: S (species number) and C (connectance) -Randomly assign each species a niche value from to 1 -Use simple rules
More informationEcology. How the World Works
Ecology How the World Works Ecology is the study of interactions between living organisms and other living organisms and non living resources that they interact with. Levels of Organization Organism- a
More informationTerrestrial Trophic Cascades
Terrestrial Trophic Cascades Shurin et al. (2002) Across ecosystem comparison of the strength of trophic cascades Meta-analysis of 102 studies reporting plant biomass Cascades strongest in marine benthos>lakes
More informationSUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Dynamics of predator-prey cycles and the effects of dispersal and the Moran effect Here we describe in more detail the dynamics of predator-prey limit cycles in our model, and the manner in which dispersal
More informationA Producer-Consumer Model With Stoichiometry
A Producer-Consumer Model With Stoichiometry Plan B project toward the completion of the Master of Science degree in Mathematics at University of Minnesota Duluth Respectfully submitted by Laura Joan Zimmermann
More informationImpact of Intraguild Predation and Stage Structure on Simple Communities along a Productivity Gradient
vol. 158, no. 3 the american naturalist september 2001 Impact of Intraguild Predation and Stage Structure on Simple Communities along a Productivity Gradient Sido D. Mylius, 1,* Katja Klumpers, 1, André
More informationFind this material useful? You can help our team to keep this site up and bring you even more content consider donating via the link on our site.
Find this material useful? You can help our team to keep this site up and bring you even more content consider donating via the link on our site. Still having trouble understanding the material? Check
More informationUnpalatable prey resolves the paradox of enrichment
Unpalatable prey resolves the paradox of enrichment Motomi Genkai-Kato * and Norio amamura Center for Ecological Research, Kyoto University, Kyoto 66-852, Japan Enrichment is an increasingly serious trend
More informationChapter 4 Ecosystems and Living Organisms
Chapter 4 Ecosystems and Living Organisms I. Evolution A. The cumulative genetic changes that occur in a population of organisms over time 1. Current theories proposed by Charles Darwin, a 19 th century
More informationOverview of Chapter 5
Chapter 5 Ecosystems and Living Organisms Overview of Chapter 5 Evolution Natural Selection Biological Communities Symbiosis Predation & Competition Community Development Succession Evolution The cumulative
More informationIDENTIFICATION: Label each of the parts of the illustration below by identifying what the arrows are pointing at. Answer the questions that follow.
5 th and 6 th Grade Science Ecology Review 3 City Academy Science Name: DIRECTIONS: Below is a cumulative review of the ecology unit. All questions are to be answered to the best of your ability in order
More informationMetacommunities Spatial Ecology of Communities
Spatial Ecology of Communities Four perspectives for multiple species Patch dynamics principles of metapopulation models (patchy pops, Levins) Mass effects principles of source-sink and rescue effects
More informationTitle A Mathematical Approach to Behavioral nd Structure of Biological Communities Author(s) 池川, 雄亮 Editor(s) Citation Issue Date 2015 URL http://hdl.handle.net/10466/14822 Rights http://repository.osakafu-u.ac.jp/dspace/
More informationDynamical Systems and Chaos Part II: Biology Applications. Lecture 6: Population dynamics. Ilya Potapov Mathematics Department, TUT Room TD325
Dynamical Systems and Chaos Part II: Biology Applications Lecture 6: Population dynamics Ilya Potapov Mathematics Department, TUT Room TD325 Living things are dynamical systems Dynamical systems theory
More informationIntroduction to Dynamical Systems
Introduction to Dynamical Systems Autonomous Planar Systems Vector form of a Dynamical System Trajectories Trajectories Don t Cross Equilibria Population Biology Rabbit-Fox System Trout System Trout System
More informationChapter 16: Competition. It s all mine, stay away!
Chapter 16: Competition It s all mine, stay away! Species Interactions +/+ +/- -/- Basic interaction -/- Pop growth rate of species 1 (dn 1 /dt) is decreased by interaction Pop growth rate of species 2
More informationSOME ELEMENTARY MECHANISMS FOR CRITICAL TRANSITIONS AND HYSTERESIS IN SIMPLE PREDATOR PREY MODELS. John Vandermeer i. Abstract
SOME ELEMENTARY MECHANISMS FOR CRITICAL TRANSITIONS AND HYSTERESIS IN SIMPLE PREDATOR PREY MODELS John Vandermeer i Abstract Trait-mediated indirect effects are increasingly acknowledged as important components
More information-The study of the interactions between the different species in an area
Community Ecology -The study of the interactions between the different species in an area Interspecific Interactions -Interaction between different species -May be positive, negative, or neutral and include
More informationChapter 6 Vocabulary. Environment Population Community Ecosystem Abiotic Factor Biotic Factor Biome
Biomes Chapter 6 Vocabulary Environment Population Community Ecosystem Abiotic Factor Biotic Factor Biome How Are Organisms On Earth Connected? All living things on Earth share resources, such as air,
More informationIntroduction interspecific interactions
Introduction There are different interspecific interactions, relationships between the species of a community (what s the definition of a community again?). While you re at it, what s the definition of
More informationCHAPTER. Evolution and Community Ecology
CHAPTER 5 Evolution and Community Ecology Lesson 5.2 Species Interactions The zebra mussel has completely displaced 20 native mussel species in Lake St. Clair. Lesson 5.2 Species Interactions The Niche
More informationRank-abundance. Geometric series: found in very communities such as the
Rank-abundance Geometric series: found in very communities such as the Log series: group of species that occur _ time are the most frequent. Useful for calculating a diversity metric (Fisher s alpha) Most
More informationThe dynamics of disease transmission in a Prey Predator System with harvesting of prey
ISSN: 78 Volume, Issue, April The dynamics of disease transmission in a Prey Predator System with harvesting of prey, Kul Bhushan Agnihotri* Department of Applied Sciences and Humanties Shaheed Bhagat
More informationTHE IMPACT OF CANNIBALISM IN THE PREY ON PREDATOR PREY SYSTEMS
Ecology, 89(11), 2008, pp. 3116 3127 Ó 2008 by the Ecological Society of America THE IMPACT OF CANNIBALISM IN THE PREY ON PREDATOR PREY SYSTEMS VOLKER H. W. RUDOLF 1 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary
More informationNumerical bifurcation analysis of a tri-trophic food web with omnivory
Mathematical Biosciences 177&178 (2002) 201 228 www.elsevier.com/locate/mbs Numerical bifurcation analysis of a tri-trophic food web with omnivory B.W. Kooi *, L.D.J. Kuijper, M.P. Boer 1, S.A.L.M. Kooijman
More informationComputational Ecology Introduction to Ecological Science. Sonny Bleicher Ph.D.
Computational Ecology Introduction to Ecological Science Sonny Bleicher Ph.D. Ecos Logos Defining Ecology Interactions: Organisms: Plants Animals: Bacteria Fungi Invertebrates Vertebrates The physical
More informationCoevolution of competitors
Coevolution of competitors 1) Coevolution 2) Ecological character displacement 3) Examples 4) Criteria for character displacement 5) Experiments on selection and evolution 6) Convergent character displacement
More informationLETTER Multi-predator effects across life-history stages: non-additivity of egg- and larval-stage predation in an African treefrog
Ecology Letters, (2003) 6: 503 508 LETTER Multi-predator effects across life-history stages: non-additivity of egg- and larval-stage predation in an African treefrog James R. Vonesh* and Craig W. Osenberg
More informationCase Studies in Ecology and Evolution
7 Competition (this chapter is still unfinished) Species compete in many ways. Sometimes there are dramatic contests, such as when male bighorns compete for access to mates. Territoriality. That kind of
More informationPULSE-SEASONAL HARVESTING VIA NONLINEAR DELAY DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS AND APPLICATIONS IN FISHERY MANAGEMENT. Lev V. Idels
PULSE-SEASONAL HARVESTING VIA NONLINEAR DELAY DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS AND APPLICATIONS IN FISHERY MANAGEMENT Lev V. Idels University-College Professor Mathematics Department Malaspina University-College
More informationUNIT 5. ECOSYSTEMS. Biocenosis Biotope Biotic factors Abiotic factors
UNIT 5. ECOSYSTEMS 1. Define: ecosystem, biocenosis, biotope, abiotic factor, biotic factor 2. Complete using this word: ecosphere, biosphere, ecology, ecosystem a) The is all of the living thing on Earth.
More informationEvolution and Community Ecology Chapter 5 HOMEWORK. Name. Period TEACHER
Evolution and Community Ecology Chapter 5 HOMEWORK Name Period TEACHER Chapter 5: Evolution and Community Ecology Page 124-155 What is evolution? What is biological evolution? What is a gene pool? What
More informationStability and complexity in model ecosystems
Stability and complexity in model ecosystems Level 2 module in Modelling course in population and evolutionary biology (701-1418-00) Module author: Sebastian Bonhoeffer Course director: Sebastian Bonhoeffer
More informationCitation for published version (APA): Hin, V. (2017). Ontogenesis: Eco-evolutionary perspective on life history complexity.
UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) Ontogenesis Hin, V. Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): Hin, V. (2017). Ontogenesis: Eco-evolutionary perspective on life history complexity.
More informationspecies in multiple predator assemblage
Ecology 2006 75, Intraguild predation reduces redundancy of predator Blackwell Publishing Ltd species in multiple predator assemblage BLAINE D. GRIFFEN and JAMES E. BYERS University of New Hampshire, Zoology
More information