Intraspecific Polymorphism, Interspecific Divergence, and ...
COMPETITION (Chapter 13). COMPETITION: INTRASPECIFIC versus INTERSPECIFIC.
-
Upload
elvin-stevenson -
Category
Documents
-
view
228 -
download
4
Transcript of COMPETITION (Chapter 13). COMPETITION: INTRASPECIFIC versus INTERSPECIFIC.
COMPETITION(Chapter 13)
COMPETITION: INTRASPECIFIC versus INTERSPECIFIC
13Leafhopper
Demonstrating Intraspecific Competition in Animals
Fig. 13.6 in Molles 2008
Number of Leafhoppers (per cage)
Number of Leafhoppers (per cage)
Demonstrating Intraspecific Competition in Animals
10Alfalfa
11
12
Demonstrating IntraspecificCompetition in Plants
Fig. 13-5 in Molles 2008
-3/2 Thinning Rule (Sometimes)
Demonstrating Intraspecific Competition in Plants
COMPETITION: INTERFERENCE vs. RESOURCE
Interference Competition
Resource Competition
Trenched (Treatment) Untrenched (Control)
7
8
Demonstrating Resource Competition
Trenched Untrenched
Demonstrating Resource Competition(Results)
Demonstrating Interference Competition.36m2 Plots, Stocked with Sliced Carrots and Potatos
Density: 50 Isopods Density: 100 Isopods
Demonstrating Interference Competition
Fig. 13.7 in Molles 2008
INTERSPECIFIC COMPETITION
Giant Kelp (Macrocystis)
Bull Kelp (Nereocystis)
Galium saxatile Galium pumilum
67
Demonstrating Interspecific Competition in Plants
Tansley (1917)
Demonstrating Interspecific Competition in Plants
Understanding Interspecific Competitionin Context of Niche
Giant Kelp (Macrocystis)
Bull Kelp (Nereocystis)
Graphical Depiction of Giant Kelp Niche(Three Axes)
Nutrients
Light
Car
bon
Dio
xid
e
15
Giant Kelp Niche:Other Abiotic
Factors?
•
•
•
•
N – Dimensional Hypervolume: Hypothetical Space that Represents ALL N Physical Factors that Influence Growth, Survival and Reproduction
Range of physical conditions in which a given species can live in the absence of negative interactions with other species
FUNDAMENTAL NICHE
Nutrients
Light
Car
bon
Dio
xid
e
1615
Negative Interactions with Other Species
NICHE OVERLAP
Fundamental Niches of Giant Kelp, Bull Kelp in One Dimension
Giant Kelp Bull Kelp
Light Intensity
Photosynthesis Rate
Photosynthesis Rate
ADJUSTMENT OF FUNDAMENTAL NICHE IN PRESENCE OF COMPETITOR
Giant Kelp Bull Kelp
Giant Kelp Bull Kelp
Light Intensity
Light Intensity
Range of physical conditions in which a given species can live in the presence of negative interactions with other species
REALIZED NICHEP
hot
osyn
thes
is R
ate
Giant Kelp Bull Kelp
Light Intensity
Fig. 13.20 in Molles 2008
Consequences of Interspecific Competition
Fundamental and Realized Niche of Chthalamus
Two Species with Same or Very Similar Niche:
Is Coexistence Possible?R
esou
rce
Uti
liza
tion
Competitive Exclusion Principle:(G.F. Gause)
Two Species with Identical Niches
CAN NOT Coexist Indefinitely
Mathematical Modeling of Interspecific Competition I(Begin with Logistic Rate Equations for N1, N2)
Note: These equations incorporate effects of intraspecific competition
Mathematical Modeling of Interspecific Competition II(Incorporate Interspecific Competition)
Mathematical Modeling of Interspecific Competition III(Assume Equilibrium Conditions)
Mathematical Modeling of Interspecific Competition IV(Determine Equations for Zero-Change Isoclines)
Fig. 14.13 in Molles 2008
Mathematical Modeling of Interspecific Competition V(Species 1 Strong Competitor, Species 2 Weak Competitor)
Mathematical Modeling of Interspecific Competition VI(Species 1 Weak Competitor, Species 2 Strong Competitor)
Mathematical Modeling of Interspecific Competition VII(Both Species are Strong Competitors)
N2
Mathematical Modeling of Interspecific Competition VII(Both Species are Weak Competitors)
Competitive Exclusion Principle:(G.F. Gause)
Two Species with Identical Niches
CAN NOT Coexist Indefinitely
(i.e., Two Strong Competitors for the Same Resource CAN NOT Co-Exist Indefinitely)
Paramecium aurelia
1
Paramecium caudatum
2
3
Testing Competitive Exclusion Principle
Fig. 13.15 in Molles 2008
Paramecium Species: Grown Separately
(Gause 1934)
Testing Competitive Exclusion Principle
Fig. 21-1 in Ricklefs and Miller 2000
Paramecium Species: Grown Together(Gause 1934)
Testing Competitive Exclusion Principle
Tribolium confusumTribolium castaneum
4 5
Testing Competitive Exclusion Principle
Fig. 13.16 in Molles 2008
Flour Beetle Species: Grown Separately
(Park 1954)
Testing Competitive Exclusion Principle
Fig. 13-16 in Molles 2008
Flour Beetle SpeciesGrown Together
(Gause 1934)
Interspecific Competition in Animals:Consequences
Wide-Leaf Cattail(Typha latifolia)
Narrow-Leaf Cattail(Typha angustifolia)
CATTAIL COMPETITION
Wide-Leaf Cattail(Typha latifolia)
Narrow-Leaf Cattail(Typha angustifolia)
Cattail Species Grown Together
Wide-Leaf Cattail(Typha latifolia)
Narrow-Leaf Cattail Removed
Narrow-Leaf Cattail (Typha angustifolia)
Wide-Leaf Cattail Removed
Balanus
9
Chthamalus10
Zonation in Barnacle Communities
Fig. 13.19 in Molles 2006
Balanus Removal:Middle Intertidal Zone
Chthamalus Survivorship
9
Dipodomys (Kangaroo Rat)
10
Perognathus (Pocket Mouse)
Large Granivores
Small Granivores
Insectivores
Onychomys
DESERT RODENTS
24 Study Plots: Chihuahuan Desert near Portal AZ
Fig. 13.23 in Molles 2006
Experiment: Removal of Large Granivores (Heske et al. 1994)
Geospiza fortis(Medium Ground-Finch)
Darwin’s Finches
Geospiza fuliginosa(Small Ground-Finch)
13
EVOLUTIONARY CONSEQUENCES OF COMPETITION
Fig. 13.25 in Molles 2006
Allopatric versus Sympatric Populations
G. fortis
G. fuliginosa
G. fortis, G. fuliginosa
G. fortis
G. fuliginosa
G. fortis, G. fuliginosa
CHARACTER DISPLACEMENT: BEAK DEPTH