Lesson 5: Eat and Be Eaten: Prey as Predator, Predator as Prey
Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.
-
Upload
quentin-sullivan -
Category
Documents
-
view
221 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.
![Page 1: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Predator-Prey Predator-Prey RelationshipsRelationships
BIOL400BIOL40021 September 201521 September 2015
![Page 2: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Evidence Predators Can Evidence Predators Can Regulate Prey Abundance Regulate Prey Abundance
Achieved via controlled prey-transplant or Achieved via controlled prey-transplant or predator-removal experimentspredator-removal experiments
Also strongly suggested by introduction of Also strongly suggested by introduction of new, exotic predatorsnew, exotic predators
![Page 3: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Fig. 5.9 p. 73Fig. 5.9 p. 73 Small mussels Small mussels
eliminated by crabs eliminated by crabs and starfish in Lough and starfish in Lough Ine, but waves and Ine, but waves and salinity limit predators salinity limit predators on open coaston open coast
Large mussels Large mussels disappeared in SE disappeared in SE Lough, where they do Lough, where they do not occur due to large not occur due to large crabscrabs
![Page 4: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Fig. 5.10 p. 74Fig. 5.10 p. 74
![Page 5: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Fig. 11.13 p. 200Fig. 11.13 p. 200
![Page 6: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Modelling Modelling Predator-Prey Predator-Prey
InteractionsInteractions
![Page 7: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Elton’s Oscillations (1924, 1942)Elton’s Oscillations (1924, 1942)
Apparent effect of prey density on predator Apparent effect of prey density on predator density in pelt datadensity in pelt data Ups and downs in lynx seemed to come just Ups and downs in lynx seemed to come just
after ups and downs of their primary prey, after ups and downs of their primary prey, snowshoe hares, on a 9-10 year cyclesnowshoe hares, on a 9-10 year cycle
Ups and downs in prey base of hares are Ups and downs in prey base of hares are probably also a part of this cycle probably also a part of this cycle
![Page 8: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Fig. 11.19 p. 203Fig. 11.19 p. 203
![Page 9: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
HANDOUT—Lynx and Hare CyclesHANDOUT—Lynx and Hare Cycles
![Page 10: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Fig. 11.2 p. 191Fig. 11.2 p. 191 Assumptions of the Assumptions of the
model:model: Single predator Single predator
species/single prey species/single prey speciesspecies
Simple relationship of Simple relationship of prey density to prey density to predation rate (i.e., predation rate (i.e., predator density)predator density)
Predator reproductive Predator reproductive rate is proportional to rate is proportional to prey densityprey density
![Page 11: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Figs. 11.15a & 11.16 p. 201Figs. 11.15a & 11.16 p. 201
![Page 12: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Laboratory Attempts to Laboratory Attempts to Generate Predator-Prey Generate Predator-Prey
OscillationsOscillations
![Page 13: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Fig. 11.7a p. 195Fig. 11.7a p. 195Gause 1934Gause 1934
![Page 14: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Fig. 11.7b p. 195Fig. 11.7b p. 195 Gause 1934Gause 1934
![Page 15: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Fig. 11.7c p. 195Fig. 11.7c p. 195 Gause 1934Gause 1934
![Page 16: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Huffaker’s Mites and Oranges Huffaker’s Mites and Oranges ExperimentsExperiments
EotetranychusEotetranychus, a mite that feeds on , a mite that feeds on orangesoranges
TyphlodromusTyphlodromus, a mite that feeds on , a mite that feeds on EotetranychusEotetranychus
Former disperses with threads of silk, Former disperses with threads of silk, latter only disperses overlandlatter only disperses overland
![Page 17: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Predator and Prey Predator and Prey on Single Orangeon Single Orange
Extinction of preyExtinction of prey Starvation and extinction of predatorStarvation and extinction of predator
![Page 18: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Fig. 11.8 p. 195Fig. 11.8 p. 195Huffaker 1958Huffaker 1958
![Page 19: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Multiple Oranges AdjacentMultiple Oranges Adjacent to One Another to One Another
Prey populations grew to 113-650 per Prey populations grew to 113-650 per orangeorange
Prey extinct in 23-32 daysPrey extinct in 23-32 days Starvation and extinction of predatorStarvation and extinction of predator
![Page 20: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Multiple Oranges, Multiple Oranges, Widely Dispersed Widely Dispersed
Prey populations grew to 2000-4000 per Prey populations grew to 2000-4000 per orangeorange
Prey extinct in 36 daysPrey extinct in 36 days Starvation and extinction of predatorStarvation and extinction of predator
![Page 21: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Vaseline Barriers, Vaseline Barriers, Oranges Dispersed Oranges Dispersed
Four oscillations generated over 14 Four oscillations generated over 14 months months
![Page 22: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Fig. 11.9 p. 196Fig. 11.9 p. 196
![Page 23: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Why it is Generally Why it is Generally NotNot That Simple in Nature That Simple in Nature
It's a food web, not a food chainIt's a food web, not a food chain Prey may have refugia, and be less prone to Prey may have refugia, and be less prone to
predation at low densitiespredation at low densities Predators may have search images that switch as Predators may have search images that switch as
prey become more abundant or less abundantprey become more abundant or less abundant Other environmental factors may influence prey or Other environmental factors may influence prey or
predator density (e.g., salinity and starfish/crabs)predator density (e.g., salinity and starfish/crabs) Predator and prey constantly are selected by one Predator and prey constantly are selected by one
another in a co-evolutionary “arms race” another in a co-evolutionary “arms race”
![Page 24: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
HANDOUT—Stenseth et al. 1997HANDOUT—Stenseth et al. 1997
![Page 25: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Predator Responses Predator Responses to Prey Densityto Prey Density
![Page 26: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Fig. 11.18 p. 202Fig. 11.18 p. 202
![Page 27: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Numerical ResponseNumerical Response
Refers to both…Refers to both… ……increases in predator N via reproductionincreases in predator N via reproduction ……aggregation of predators in prey-rich areas aggregation of predators in prey-rich areas
![Page 28: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
HANDOUT—Bowman et al. 2006HANDOUT—Bowman et al. 2006
![Page 29: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Functional ResponseFunctional Response
Change in per-capita rate of prey Change in per-capita rate of prey consumptionconsumption Type I—constant increase in per-capita rate Type I—constant increase in per-capita rate
of consumption as prey density increasesof consumption as prey density increases Type II—predator satiation at high prey Type II—predator satiation at high prey
densities plus the effect of handling timedensities plus the effect of handling time Type III—satiation/handling time effect at high Type III—satiation/handling time effect at high
prey densities, and, at low prey densities, prey densities, and, at low prey densities, refugium saturation plus prey-switching refugium saturation plus prey-switching behaviorbehavior
![Page 30: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Fig. 11.14 p. 200Fig. 11.14 p. 200
![Page 31: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Fig. 11.15 p. 201Fig. 11.15 p. 201
![Page 32: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
HANDOUT—Brown et al. 2010HANDOUT—Brown et al. 2010
![Page 33: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Predator-Prey Model Predator-Prey Model Incorporating a Incorporating a
Functional ResponseFunctional Response
![Page 34: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Panel a—Prey regulated near KPanel a—Prey regulated near Kpreyprey
![Page 35: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Panel b—Prey regulated near KPanel b—Prey regulated near Kpreyprey or at very low density (B is unstable point)or at very low density (B is unstable point)
![Page 36: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Panel c—Prey regulated well below KPanel c—Prey regulated well below Kpreyprey
![Page 37: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Panel d—Prey is driven to extinctionPanel d—Prey is driven to extinction
![Page 38: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Indirect Effects Indirect Effects and Predationand Predation
![Page 39: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Indirect Effects Indirect Effects and Predationand Predation
An effect expressed upon a species, A, via An effect expressed upon a species, A, via an interaction between species B and Can interaction between species B and C
B, by preying on C, may benefit AB, by preying on C, may benefit A ExsExs: Keystone predators that limit strong : Keystone predators that limit strong
competitorscompetitors
![Page 40: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Fig. 19.17 p. 392Fig. 19.17 p. 392Paine 1974Paine 1974
![Page 41: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Fig. 20.12 p. 413Fig. 20.12 p. 413
![Page 42: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Fig. 11.1 p. 189Fig. 11.1 p. 189
Left: Competition between two predatorsLeft: Competition between two predators Right: Apparent competitionRight: Apparent competition
If HIf H11 increases, P increases, P11 increases, H increases, H22 decreases, and P decreases, and P22 decreasesdecreases
• Last change not necessarily due to competition between Last change not necessarily due to competition between predatorspredators
![Page 43: Predator-Prey Relationships BIOL400 21 September 2015.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022081512/5a4d1b2c7f8b9ab059999594/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Schmitt (1987)Schmitt (1987)
Experiments with snails, clams, and their Experiments with snails, clams, and their major predatorsmajor predators
• A lobster, an octopus, and a whelk A lobster, an octopus, and a whelk Adding either prey caused aggregative Adding either prey caused aggregative
numerical response of predators, leading numerical response of predators, leading to reduced density of other preyto reduced density of other prey
““Apparent competition” between snails and Apparent competition” between snails and clamsclams