Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Predator Impact (predator + impact)
Selected AbstractsPredator behaviour and prey density: evaluating density-dependent intraspecific interactions on predator functional responsesJOURNAL OF ANIMAL ECOLOGY, Issue 1 2001Nilsson P. Anders Abstract 1In models of size-structured predator,prey systems, the effects are evaluated of gape-size limited predation on prey population growth and density when predators are non-interacting, cannibalistic, interfering, and cannibalistic and interfering. 2Predation from non-interacting predators markedly reduces prey density, compared with prey densities in the absence of predation. When density-dependent cannibalism between predators is introduced, predator density and therefore total functional response decrease, resulting in a decrease in predation pressure and higher prey densities. 3Size- and density-dependent interference between predators substantially decreases functional responses in the predators, and the prey population is thus allowed to grow more dense. Allowing for cannibalism between interfering predators also decreases predator density, but here the decreased number of predators does not have the releasing effect seen in solely cannibalistic predators. The interference between predators decreases with predator density, and per capita functional responses increase and compensate for the decrease in predator density. 4These theoretical results are compared with results from natural systems with pikeperch and northern pike. Both species are cannibalistic, and pike are also kleptoparasitic, mirroring the models. Results from introductions of the different piscivores into natural systems corroborate the outcome of the models, since introduction or increased densities of pikeperch have shown to have severe and long-lasting effects on prey, while pike have only initial, decreasing over time effects on prey stock. Thus, predator behaviour may seriously affect predator impact on prey, and size- and density-dependent interactions between predators may be a major key to the understanding of predator,prey dynamics and community composition in lakes. [source] The effect of the sampling scale on zooplankton community assessment and its implications for the conservation of temporary ponds in south-west SpainAQUATIC CONSERVATION: MARINE AND FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS, Issue 2 2007Khalid Fahd Abstract 1.The zooplankton (rotifer and microcrustacean) assemblages of temporary ponds in the Doņana National Park (south-west Spain) have been compared in two surveys of contrasting scales that resulted in the same number of samples: an extensive survey of 36 ponds sampled in May 1998 (or widespread survey) and a survey of nine ponds sampled four times over 2 years (or cumulative survey). 2.The total number of microcrustacean and rotifer taxa was larger in the cumulative survey (43 and 41 taxa, respectively) than in the widespread survey (39 and 34, respectively). Crustacean assemblages became less alike throughout the cumulative survey. 3.The presence of invertebrates (Coleoptera, Odonata, Heteroptera and crayfish) and aquatic vertebrates (fish and salamanders) was recorded as an estimate of potential predator impact on zooplankton. Several pond features (water depth, conductivity, pH, chlorophyll a concentration, distance to the nearest permanent pond and to the marsh) were also measured in both surveys. 4.A combination of these environmental factors was more strongly related to the similarity matrices derived from the zooplankton assemblages of the cumulative survey (Rho=0.7) than to those of the widespread survey (Rho<0.4). The distance of ponds to the marsh was an important factor in explaining this correlation as well as the strongest factor in the ordination of crustacean assemblages following a CCA. 5.Predation by exotic fish in long-hydroperiod ponds where overflow drains to the nearby marsh (fish source) is the mechanism likely to explain the changes in crustacean composition recorded in the cumulative survey. 6.The cumulative survey was more suitable for the study of zooplankton diversity as it rendered a higher number of taxa and gave more insight into the mechanisms that explain taxon richness. Thus, conservation strategies in temporary habitats require a scale of observation that includes long temporal changes. Copyright Š 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] Spillover edge effects: the dispersal of agriculturally subsidized insect natural enemies into adjacent natural habitatsECOLOGY LETTERS, Issue 5 2006Tatyana A. Rand Abstract The cross-edge spillover of subsidized predators from anthropogenic to natural habitats is an important process affecting wildlife, especially bird, populations in fragmented landscapes. However, the importance of the spillover of insect natural enemies from agricultural to natural habitats is unknown, despite the abundance of studies examining movement in the opposite direction. Here, we synthesize studies from various ecological sub-disciplines to suggest that spillover of agriculturally subsidized insect natural enemies may be an important process affecting prey populations in natural habitat fragments. This contention is based on (1) the ubiquity of agricultural,natural edges in human dominated landscapes; (2) the substantial literature illustrating that crop and natural habitats share important insect predators; and (3) the clear importance of the landscape matrix, specifically distance to ecological edges, in influencing predator impacts in agroecosystems. Further support emerges from theory on the importance of cross-boundary subsidies for within site consumer,resource dynamics. In particular, high productivity and temporally variable resource abundance in agricultural systems are predicted to result in strong spillover effects. More empirical work examining the prevalence and significance of such natural enemy spillover will be critical to a broader understanding of fragmentation impacts on insect predator,prey interactions. [source] Seed predation, not seed dispersal, explains the landscape-level abundance of an early-successional plantJOURNAL OF ECOLOGY, Issue 4 2006JOHN L. ORROCK Summary 1Plants may not occur in a given area if there are no suitable sites for seeds to establish (microsite limitation), if seeds fail to arrive in suitable microsites (dispersal limitation) or if seeds in suitable microsites are destroyed by predators (predator limitation). 2We conducted a large-scale study to determine the importance of dispersal limitation and predator limitation in affecting the distribution of pokeweed, Phytolacca americana, in 401-ha experimental patches arrayed in eight groups of five patches distributed across a 300-km2 region. 3Microsite limitation was minimized by clearcutting and burning existing vegetation, creating the type of disturbed habitat in which P. americana readily germinates and establishes. The role of dispersal limitation was examined by adding approximately 7000 seeds to each of eight patches in March 2000. The role of seed predation was examined in all 40 patches using experimental exclosures from June 2000 to July 2001. 4The number of P. americana plants in September 2000 was unchanged by seed addition. However, fewer P. americana plants were found in patches where seed predators removed more P. americana seeds from experimental exclosures. These data suggest that P. americana is not limited by seed dispersal. Rather, in habitats where microsites are readily available, the abundance of P. americana among patches appears to be limited by the activities of seed predators. 5When dispersal and microsites are not limiting, the role of local seed predators can be important for generating emergent, large-scale patterns of plant abundance across landscapes. Moreover, because predators may generate large-scale patterns that resemble other forms of limitation and predators may target specific species, predator impacts should be more frequently incorporated into experiments on the role of seed limitation and plant community composition. [source] | ||||||||||