The ecological niche, function of a species in the community Resource utilization functions (RUFs) Competitive communities in equilibrium with their resources.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
COMMUNITY ECOLOGY.
Advertisements

Predation and Herbivory
Exploitation.
Predation and Parasitism The potential impact of predation is not questioned In fact, it may be one of the most studied aspects of population/community.
Species Interactions Dandelion Gentian Finch Cactus Shark Remora Oak Gypsy moth Lion Zebra Tapeworm.
Predation (Chapter 18) Predator-prey cycles Models of predation
Predation – Chapter 13. Types of Predators Herbivores – animals that prey on green plants or their seed and fruits. –Plants are usually damaged but not.
Predation – one species feeds on another  enhances fitness of predator but reduces fitness of prey ( +/– interaction)
Community Ecology Chapter 47 Mader: Biology 8th Ed.
Living organisms exist within webs of interactions with other living creatures, the most important of which involve eating or being eaten (trophic interactions).
Predation – one species feeds on another  enhances fitness of predator but reduces fitness of prey ( +/– interaction)
Objectives - Chapter What is an exploitative interaction?
1 Community Ecology Chapter Biological Communities Community: all the organisms that live together in a specific place –Evolve together –Forage.
Biology, 9th ed, Sylvia Mader
Predation (Chapter 15) Predator-prey cycles Physical Characteristics
Competition.
Community Ecology Chapter 54. Slide 2 of 20 Community  Def. – group of populations (different species) that live close enough to interact  Interspecific.
Community Ecology Chapter 53. Community - group of species living close enough for interaction. Species richness – # of species a community contains;
Species Interactions: Competition (Ch. 13). Competition (Ch. 13) Definition: –Individuals attempt to gain more resource in limiting supply –(-,-) interaction:
Competition Individual Interactions, part 1. Niche A concept that encompasses all of the individual environmental requirements of a species This is definitely.
1 Competition Chapter Outline Resource Competition  Modes Niches Mathematic and Laboratory Models  Lotka-Volterra Competition and Niches  Character.
Exploitative Interactions
Community Ecology 10/27/06. Review of last time: Multiple ChoiceS Which of the following are true of the following equations: Circle ALL correct answers:
A biological community is an association of interacting populations
Predation – what is it? One animal kills another for food ( + - interaction ) One animal kills another for food ( + - interaction ) Parasitism / Parasitoidism.
Interspecific Competition. Population interactions.
Trophic Structure Many early researchers quickly realized communities and systems were much to complex to analyze easily Consequently many adopted a trophodynamic.
MonthDayTopic Nov.8Individuals to populations 10Holiday! 13Populations to communities 15Community patterns 17Ecosystems 20Film-1 st showing 22Film-2 nd.
UNIT VOCABULARY & NOTES Stability and Change. Ecological succession (succession) Process in which communities of plant and animal species in a particular.
Community Ecology Chapter 53. Community - group of species living close enough for interaction. Species richness – # of species a community contains;
Understanding Populations
Community Processes: More on Competition Theory How it works.
Ch. 44 & 45 Concept of the Community
Definitions Ecology defined by interactions and interconnections – with own species, other species, environment; organisms affect each other, environment;
Interspecific Interactions and the Ecology of Communities Chapter 57
Chapter 13 Competition. Modes of Competition Interference vs. exploitation: –Direct aggressive interaction between individuals –Using up resource Intraspecific:
Chapter 53 – Community Ecology What is a community? A community is a group of populations of various species living close enough for potential interaction.
OUR Ecological Footprint 1. 2.
COMPETITION (Chapter 13). COMPETITION: INTRASPECIFIC versus INTERSPECIFIC.
Two-species competition The Lotka-Volterra Model Working with differential equations to predict population dynamics.
The quantitative theory of competition was developed by Vito Volterra and Alfred Lotka in
Second Exam Thursday Chapters 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 (most)
1 Modeling Interspecific Competition Lotka Volterra Effect of interspecific competition on population growth of each species:  dN 1 / d t = r max1 N 1.
Second Exam One week from today Chapters 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 (most) Can humans share spaceship earth? Why Can't We Humans Share Spaceship Earth?
11 Competition Chapter 13 Copyright © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Permission required for reproduction or display.
Exploitation vs. interference competition
Population Interactions Ch. 51. Ecological Community Interactions between all living things in an area Coevolution  changes encourages by interactions.
Chapter 53 ~ Community Ecology
MATH3104: Anthony J. Richardson.
Ecological footprints of some nations already exceed available ecological capacity. 1.
1. Population and community ecology 2 © Zanichelli editore 2015.
Vocabulary 1. Ecosystem – interactions between the biotic organisms and the abiotic materials and how materials and energy are transferred 2. Biotic –
Modelling concepts Modelling in discrete time (difference equations, also known as updating equations) Modelling in continuous time (differential equations)
Neutral Stability. Vectors spiral inwards Functional response = rate at which individual predators capture and eat more prey per unit time as prey.
Which species benefits from its interactions?
Gause ’ s Paramecium competition lab experiments Park’s Tribolium competition experiments Lotka-Volterra competition equations Zero isoclines dN 1 /dt.
Ecology: Ecological Interactions David Mellor, PhD Citizen Science Coordinator Virginia Master Naturalists.
Predation – one species feeds on another  enhances fitness of predator but reduces fitness of prey ( +/– interaction)
Predator/Prey. Two big themes: 1.Predators can limit prey populations. This keeps populations below K.
Ecology (BIO C322) Community Ecology. Habitat and Niche Habitat = The place where an organism lives. Ecological niche = Physical space + Organism’s functional.
Ecology. What is ecology? The study of interactions between organisms and their environment Remember: Cell  Tissue  Organ  Organ System  Organism.
All interactions between biotic factors that can impact an ecosystem
14th Lecture – Oct. 25, Next Exam is November 3.
Gause’s and Park’s competition experiments
High Parasitoids Parasite Intimacy Low Predator Grazer Low Lethality
Experimental Ecology. Controls. Manipulation. Replicates
Principle of Competitive Exclusion or Gause’s Principle
Species Interactions Lion Zebra Tapeworm Dandelion Gentian Finch
Exploitation.
Presentation transcript:

The ecological niche, function of a species in the community Resource utilization functions (RUFs) Competitive communities in equilibrium with their resources Hutchinson ’ s n-dimensional hypervolume concept Euclidean distances in n- space (Greek mathematician, 300 BC) Fundamental versus Realized Niches

Resource matrices of utilization coefficients Niche dynamics Niche dimensionality and diffuse competition Complementarity of niche dimensions Niche Breadth: Specialization versus generalization. Similar resources favor specialists, different resources favor generalists Periodic table of lizard niches (many dimensions) Thermoregulatory axis: thermoconformers —> thermoregulators

Experimental Ecology Controls Manipulation Replicates Pseudoreplication Rocky Intertidal Space Limited System Paine ’ s Pisaster removal experiment Connell: Balanus and Chthamalus Menge ’ s Leptasterias and Pisaster experiment Dunham ’ s Big Bend saxicolous lizards Brown ’ s Seed Predation experiments Simberloff-Wilson ’ s defaunation experiment

R. T. Paine (1966)

Joseph Connell (1961)

Bruce Menge (1972)

Menge 1972 Bruce Menge

Grapevine Hills, Big Bend National Park Sceloporus merriami and Urosaurus ornatus Six rocky outcrops: 2 controls, 2 Sceloporus removal plots and 2 Urosaurus removal areas. ======================================================== 4 year study: 2 wet and 2 dry: insect abundances Monitored density, feeding success, growth rates, body weights, survival, lipid levels Urosaurus removal did not effect Sceloporus density No effects during wet years (insect food plentiful) Insects scarce during dry years: Urosaurus growth and survival was higher on Sceloporus removal plots Arthur Dunham

James Brown Dipodomys kangaroo rats Pogonomyrmex harvester ants

Experimental Design of Seed Predation in the Chihuahuan Desert ___________________________________________________ PlotsTreatments ___________________________________________________ 11,14Controls 6,13Seed addition, large seeds, constant rate 2,22Seed addition, small seeds, constant rate 9,20Seed addition, mixed seeds, constant rate 1,18Seed addition, mixed seeds, temporal pulse 5,24Rodent removal, Dipodomys spectabilis (largest kangaroo rat) 15,21Rodent removal, all Dipodomys species (kangaroo rats) 7,16Rodent removal, all seed-eating rodents 8,12Pogonomyrmex harvester ants 4,17All seed-eating ants 3,19All Dipodomys plus Pogonomyrmex ants 10,23All seed-eating rodents plus all seed-eating ants ___________________________________________________________ Munger, J. C. and J. H. Brown Competition in desert rodents: an experiment with semipermeable enclosures. Science 211:

open circles = rodents removed solid circles = controls

Defaunation Experiments in the Florida Keys Islands of mangrove trees were surveyed and numbers of arthropod species recorded Islands then covered in plastic tents and fumigated with methyl bromide Islands then resurveyed at intervals to document recolonization Simberloff and Wilson 1970

Evidence for Stability of Trophic Structure? First number is the number of species before defaunation, second in parentheses is the number after _______________________________________________________________________________________ Trophic Classes ______________________________________________________________________________ Island H S D W A C P ? Total _______________________________________________________________________________________ E1 9 (7)1 (0)3 (2)0 (0)3 (0)2 (1)2 (1)0 (0)20 (11) E211 (15)2 (2)2 (1)2 (2)7 (4)9 (4)3 (0)0 (1)36 (29) E3 7 (10)1 (2)3 (2)2 (0)5 (6)3 (4)2 (2)0 (0)23 (26) ST2 7 (6)1 (1)2 (1)1 (0)6 (5)5 (4)2 (1)1 (0)25 (18) E7 9 (10)1 (0)2 (1)1 (2)5 (3)4 (8)1 (2)0 (1)23 (27) E9 12 (7)1 (0)1 (1)2 (2)6 (5) 13 (10)2 (3)0 (1)37 (29) Totals 55 (55)7 (5) 13 (8)8 (6) 32 (23) 36 (31) 12 (9) 1 (3) 164 (140) _______________________________________________________________________________________ H = herbivore S = scavenger D = detritus feeder W = wood borer A = ant C = carnivorous predator P = parasite ? = undetermined

Wilson 1969

Predation and Parasitism

Predator-Prey Experiments Georgii F. Gause

Predator-Prey Experiments Georgii F. Gause

Predator-Prey Experiments Georgii F. Gause

Lotka-Volterra Predation Equations coefficients of predation, p 1 and p 2 dN 1 /dt = r 1 N 1 – p 1 N 1 N 2 dN 2 /dt = p 2 N 1 N 2 – d 2 N 2 No self damping (no density dependence) dN 1 /dt = 0 when r 1 = p 1 N 2 or N 2 = r 1 / p 1 dN 2 /dt = 0 when p 2 N 1 = d 2 or N 1 = d 2 / p 2 Alfred J. Lotka Vito Volterra

Neutral Stability (Vectors spiral in closed loops)

Vectors spiral inwards (Damped Oscillations)

Damped Oscillations

Vectors spiral inwards (Damped Oscillations) Prey self damping

Mike Rosenzweig Robert MacArthur

Mike Rosenzweig Robert MacArthur

Moderately efficient predator Neutral stability — Vectors form a closed ellipse. Amplitude of oscillations remains constant. <— Mike Rosenzweig Robert MacArthur —>

Unstable — extremely efficient predator Vectors spiral outwards until a Limit Cycle is reached Robert MacArthur —> <— Mike Rosenzweig

Damped Oscillations — inefficient predator Vectors spiral inwards to stable equilibrium point Robert MacArthur —> <— Mike Rosenzweig

Functional response = rate at which Individual predators capture and eat more prey per unit time as prey density increases C. S. Holling

Numerical response = increased prey density raises the predator ’ s population size and a greater number of predators consume An increased number of prey

Gause’s Didinium Experiments Lotka-Volterra Predation Equations: N 1 N 2 = Contacts coefficients of predation, p 1 and p 2 dN 1 /dt = r 1 N 1 – p 1 N 1 N 2 dN 2 /dt = p 2 N 1 N 2 – d 2 N 2 No self damping (no density dependence) dN 1 /dt = 0 when r 1 = p 1 N 2 or N 2 = r 1 / p 1 dN 2 /dt = 0 when p 2 N 1 = d 2 or N 1 = d 2 / p 2 Neutral Stability Prey Refuges Functional and Numerical Responses

Adding Prey self-damping stabilizes Prey-Predator isocline analyses Predator efficiency, Prey escape ability Prey refuges, coevolutionary race Predators usually destabilizing

Prey Isocline Hump Efficient Predator —> unstable Inefficient Predator —> stable Predator Switching, frequency dependence, stabilizes “Prudent” Predation and Optimal Yield Feeding territories Consequence of senescence

Predator Escape Tactics Aspect Diversity Cryptic coloration (countershading) Disruptive coloration Flash coloration Eyespots, head mimicry Warning (aposematic) coloration Alarm signals Hawk alarm calls Selfish callers Plant secondary chemicals