Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

must get to patches first,

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "must get to patches first,"— Presentation transcript:

1 must get to patches first,
Axis Tradeoff Am. beech Sugar maple Allocation of Energy: vertical or horizontal Sun to shade Cheetah Lion In capture techniques mass vs speed Prey size/speed BTGW Blackburnian Time allocation; adaptation to parts of the tree Micro-habitats in spruce trees G. pyramidum G. allenbyii Cream-skimmers must get to patches first, or monopolize access Patch quality

2 HW #3 (25 points): Mechanisms of Coexistence
Due March 20th. See Website 77% turned in 2 HWs 45% 0 or 1 HW Next week: Mutualisms; Mark McGinley March 20-22: Communities and Food Webs; Travis Hinkelman Exam II: Post-LV competition up to spring break MARCH 29th

3 X - + - + Effect * of species 1 on species 2 COMPETITION PREDATION
MUTUALISM * On per capita growth rate

4 Predation – species interaction where one party benefits
(predator) and one is hurt (prey) - behaviorally: diet choice, patch use community level: How does predation contribute to species diversity ? - population impacts: how predators control and/or regulate prey numbers (or vice versa) Lethal approach – predators kill their prey Fear approach – predators scare their prey

5 Predators have two responses to their prey:
Numerical response -  predators with  prey Functional response – predator consumption changes with prey density type II - satiation type III # prey consumed type I - linear density of prey (N)

6 Predator-prey models 1 N = r(K-N) - (N)P N t K 1 P = (N)N - d
= conversion of consumed prey into new predators d = predator death rate (N) = predator functional response rate of prey consumption by an individual predator as a function of prey density. Predator-prey models 1 N = r(K-N) - (N)P N t K 1 P = (N)N - d P t mortality from predators logistic growth mortality birth via consumption of prey

7 What does it mean for the prey isocline to be humped?
Pred (-) Pred (+) P Prey (+) Prey (-) K N What does it mean for the predator isocline to be a vertical line?

8 What does it mean for the prey isocline to be humped?
safety in #’s limits to growth P N What does it mean for the predator isocline to be a vertical line?  no interactions among predators

9 Predator-prey Isoclines: per capita growth rates = 0
Apex of isocline: stable limit cycle (neither expands nor dampens) Region of pos. DD: expanding oscillations (unstable) Region of neg. DD: damped oscillations (stable) P N

10

11

12

13 Region of pos. DD: expanding oscillations (unstable) P N

14 Unstable dynamics leads to population eruptions,
particularly among insects Eucalyptus psyllid Spruce budworm Pine beauty moth Viburnum whitefly

15 How do you stabilize unstable predator-prey interactions?
(Huffaker’s 1958 experiments) prey predator Simple environments lead to simple outcomes -- EXTINCTION

16 So, create complex environments including barriers to predator
dispersal and cycles emerge – illustrates the importance of REFUGES

17 Physical Refugia – Predators
do not have access to prey

18 * * * * * * Behavioral Refugia – Predators
and prey not together in time and space

19 Refugia work by reducing predator efficiency
& go from unstable to stable P N Low N* = efficient predator High N* = inefficient predator

20 What NOT to do – the Paradox of Enrichment
Feed deer (increases K to K’) mountain lion stable EQ K K mule deer mule deer unstable EQ (1) Productivity goes into building new predators NOT prey (2) Instability increases (3) Populations go extinct P* N* K K’

21 Summary: Predator-prey interactions contain inherent time lags that result in population cycles (2) These cycles can be stable, unstable, or neutrally stable (3) Relatively efficient predators lead to unstable cycles and extinction (4) Complex environments and refuges can stabilize predator-prey interactions (5) Enriching the prey population is not a viable strategy, rather it destabilizes interactions and leads to population extinction

22 The Ecology of FEAR

23

24 Fear in the South African
Landscape – Augrabies NP Rock Hyrax

25 The view away from the Kopje -

26

27 Comparison of the lethal and fear approaches
predators kill their prey Population density driven systems Brownian motion behavior of pred/prey predators scare their prey Fear driven systems: fierce predators and fearful prey Sophisticated game of stealth and fear L W W L W W L W

28 The Catch-22 of the lethal approach
Inefficient predators lead to extinction of the predator in variable environments Efficient predators lead to highly unstable predator- prey interactions K K K

29 The Catch-22 of the lethal approach
Inefficient predators lead to extinction of the predator in variable environments K K K

30 Incorporating the Ecology of Fear (Brown et al. 1999)
Prey are apprehensive – i.e., they engage in vigilance behavior M Fear (i.e., predation risk) = (prey have perfect info) (k + bu*) Fear: -  w/likelihood of encountering a predator, M -  w/predator’s lethality, 1/k -  w/effectiveness of vigilance, b -  w/level of vigilance, u* # pred, #prey, feeding opportunities

31 Too much vigilance  miss out on valuable feeding opportunities
Tradeoff: Too much vigilance  miss out on valuable feeding opportunities Too little vigilance  likely killed by a predator Bend down the predator’s isocline. Predator’s have reduced efficiency because more predators results in greater vigilance in the prey making them harder to catch Interference or Behavioral Resource Depression Shift the hump in the prey’s isocline. Still safety in #s, but reduced high N reduces its effectiveness

32 Implications: Greater stability in predator-prey interactions – no Catch-22, and reduce the Paradox of Enrichment (2) Territoriality in fierce predators may function to protect the catchability of the prey – avoid the “wayward” Mnt. Lion stumbling into your territory (3) Behavior (e.g., vigilance) is a leading indicator of ecological change

33 Wolves, elk, and bison in Yellowstone: reestablishing the
“Landscape of Fear” (Laundre et al – Can J. Zool. 79:1401) Wolves reintroduced into the Lamar Valley of Yellowstone in

34 This now becomes a familiar scene – wohoo!!!

35 Vigilance in female elk
w/calves increases… ...while time spent foraging declines

36 Similarly for bison, however, males and females
w/o calves no show behavioral shift

37 1996 2002

38 1997 versus 2001

39 Three kinds of evidence:
The changes are much faster than could occur from elk mortality Reduced herbivory is restricted to risky habitats Elk have exhibited behavioral changes consistent with an Ecology of Fear Hypothesis: (1) favor areas with good visibility & escape structures (scat) (2) increased vigilance and less feeding These changes have left physiological evidence

40 Cottonwood trees need wolves in order to
establish their populations.... ...as does willow and aspen.

41 Experimental demonstrations of non-lethal effect of predators
O. Schmitz et al. 1997 lethal spiders non-lethal if spiders have (-) on grasshoppers Control no spiders GH Plants

42 Most of the decrease in grasshoppers is due to ‘non-lethal’ effects
20% 29%

43 Shift in daily activity to safer (from predators) but high stress
How do grasshoppers die with non-lethal spiders? w/o w/spiders Shift in daily activity to safer (from predators) but high stress Exposure to Sun & Heat

44 Do we see an increase in plant biomass?
Its less clear there is an effect on plants

45 Broad Conclusions: Predators have at least two general effects on prey: lethal and non-lethal Predators kill prey and are also involved in a sophisticated game of stealth and fear Incorporating behavior (Fear) has important consequences for pred-prey interactions ….”Ignore Behavior at your peril”

46

47

48 Are lemmings and voles predators or prey ?? Raptors Raptors Voles
Roots Raptors Lemmings Moss Are lemmings and voles predators or prey ??


Download ppt "must get to patches first,"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google