Patterns of patch rejection in size-structured populations: Beyond the ideal free distribution and size segregation

Evolutionary Ecology Research

Volumn 3, Issue 7, 2001, Pages 805-827

  Adler, Frederick R ^a   Richards, Shane A ^b,c   De Roos, André M ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF UTAH   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^c NATIONAL CENTER FOR ECOLOGICAL ANALYSIS AND SYNTHESIS   (United States)

Author keywords

Foraging predation trade off; Ideal free distribution; Optimal foraging; Size structure

Indexed keywords

EID: 0042411096     PISSN: 15220613     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Abrams, P.A. 1999. The adaptive dynamics of consumer choice. Am. Nat., 153: 83-97.
2. Bernstein, C., Auger, P. and Poggiale, J.C. 1999. Predator migration decisions, the ideal free distribution, and predator-prey dynamics. Am. Nat., 153: 267-281.
3. Brown, J.S. and Mitchell, W.A. 1989. Diet selection on depletable resources. Oikos, 54: 33-34.
4. Cartar, R.V. and Abrahams, M.V. 1997. Predicting the distribution of organisms among a few patches: problems with detecting departures from the ideal free distribution. Oikos, 78: 388-393.
5. Cezilly, F. and Boy, V. 1991. Ideal free distribution and individual decision rules - a Bayesian-approach. Acta Oecol., 12: 403-410.
6. Dolman, P.M. and Sutherland, W.J. 1997. Spatial patterns of depletion imposed by foraging vertebrates: theory, review and meta-analysis. J. Anim. Ecol., 66: 481-494.
7. Farnsworth, K.D. and Beecham, J.A. 1997. Beyond the ideal free distribution: more general models of predator distribution. J. Theor. Biol., 187: 389-396.
8. Fretwell, S.D. and Lucas Jr., H.L. 1970. On territorial behavior and other factors influencing habitat distribution of birds. 1. Theoretical development. Acta Biotheor., 19: 16-36.
9. Frischknecht, M. 1996. Predators choosing between patches with standing crop: the influence of switching rules and input types. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 38: 159-166.
10. Geritz, S.A.H., Van der Meijden, E. and Metz, J.A.J. 1998. Evolutionary dynamics of seed size and seedling competitive ability. Theor. Popul. Biol., 55: 324-343.
11. Giannico, G.R. and Healey, M.C. 1999. Ideal free distribution theory as a tool to examine juvenile coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) habitat choice under different conditions of food abundance and cover. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci., 56: 2362-2373.
12. Gilliam, J.F. and Fraser, D.F. 1987. Habitat selection under predation hazard: test of a model with foraging minnows. Ecology, 68: 1856-1862.
13. Grand, T.C. 1997. Foraging site selection by juvenile coho salmon: ideal free distributions of unequal competitors. Anim. Behav., 53: 185-196.
14. Grand, T.C. and Dill, L.M. 1997. The energetic equivalence of cover to juvenile coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch): ideal free distribution theory. Behav. Ecol., 8: 437-447.
15. Grand, T.C. and Dill, L.M. 1999. Predation risk, unequal competitors and the ideal free distribution. Evol. Ecol. Res., 1: 389-409.
16. Gray, R.D. and Kennedy, M. 1994. Perceptual constraints on optimal foraging: a reason for departures from the ideal free distribution? Anim. Behav., 47: 469-471.
17. Holmgren, N. 1995. The ideal free distribution of unequal competitors - predictions from a behavior-based functional-response. J. Anim. Ecol., 64: 197-212.
18. Houston, A.I. and Lang, A. 1998. The ideal free distribution with unequal competitors: the effects of modelling methods. Anim. Behav., 56: 243-251.
19. Houston, A.I. and McNamara, J.M. 1988. The ideal free distribution when competitive abilities differ: an approach based on statistical mechanics. Anim. Behav., 36: 166-174.
20. Houston, A.I., McNamara, J.M. and Milinski, M. 1995. The distribution of animals between resources: a compromise between equal numbers and equal intake rates. Anim. Behav., 49: 248-251.
21. Hughes, N. and Grand, T.C. 2000. Physiological ecology meets the ideal-free distribution: predicting the distribution of size-structured fish populations across temperature gradients. Environ. Biol. Fishes, 59: 285-298.
22. Hugie, D.M. and Grand, T.C. 1998. Movement between patches, unequal competitors and the ideal free distribution. Evol. Ecol., 12: 1-19.
23. Kacelnik, A., Krebs, J.R. and Bernstein, C. 1992. The ideal free distribution and predator-prey populations. Trends Ecol. Evol., 7: 50-55.
24. Kennedy, M. and Gray, R.D. 1993. Can ecological theory predict the distribution of foraging animals - a critical analysis of experiments on the ideal free distribution. Oikos, 68: 158-166.
25. Korona, R. 1989. Evolutionarily stable strategies in competition for resource intake rate maximization: I. The model. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 25: 193-200.
26. Krause, J. 1994. The influence of food competition and predation risk on size-assortative shoaling in juvenile chub (Leuciscus cephalus). Ethology, 96: 105-116.
27. Krivan, V. and Sikder, A. 1999. Optimal foraging and predator-prey dynamics, II. Theor. Popul. Biol., 55: 111-126.
28. Lessells, C.M. 1995. Putting resource dynamics into continuous input ideal free distribution models. Anim. Behav., 49: 487-494.
29. Levin, S.A. 1970. Community equilibria and stability, and an extension of the competitive exclusion principle. Am. Nat., 104: 413-423.
30. Levin, S.A., Levin, J.E. and Paine, R.T. 1977. Snowy owl predation on short-eared owls. Condor, 79: 395.
31. Lima, S.L. and Dill, L.M. 1990. Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. Can. J. Zool., 68: 619-640.
32. Milinski, M. 1994. Long-term memory for food patches and implications for ideal free distributions in sticklebacks. Ecology, 75: 1150-1156.
33. Moody, A.L. and Houston, A.I. 1995. Interference and the ideal free distribution. Anim. Behav., 49: 1065-1072.
34. Moody, A.L., Houston, A.I. and McNamara, J.M. 1996. Ideal free distributions under predation risk. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 38: 131-143.
35. Parker, G.A. and Sutherland, W.J. 1986. Ideal free distributions when individuals differ in competitive ability - phenotype-limited ideal free models. Anim. Behav., 34: 1222-1242.
36. Ruxton, G.D. and Humphries, S. 1999. Multiple ideal free distributions of unequal competitors. Evol. Ecol. Res., 1: 635-640.
37. Ruxton, G.D., Guerney, W.S.C. and de Roos, A.M. 1992. Interference and generation cycles. Theor. Popul. Biol., 42: 235-253.
38. Spencer, H.G., Kennedy, M. and Gray, R.D. 1995. Patch choice with competitive asymmetries and perceptual limits - the importance of history. Anim. Behav., 50: 497-508.
39. Spencer, H.G., Kennedy, M. and Gray, R.D. 1996. Perceptual constraints on optimal foraging: the effects of variation among foragers. Evol. Ecol., 10: 331-339.
40. Stephens, D.W. and Krebs, J.R. 1986. Foraging Theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
41. Sutherland, W.J. and Parker, G.A. 1992. The relationship between continuous input and interference models of ideal free distributions with unequal competitors. Anim. Behav., 44: 345-355.
42. Sutherland, W.J., Townsend, C. and Patmore, J. 1988. A test of the ideal free distribution with unequal competitors. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 23: 51-53.
43. Tilman, D. 1982. Resource Competition and Community Structure. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
44. Tregenza, T. and Thompson, D.J. 1998. Unequal competitor ideal free distribution in fish? Evol. Ecol., 12: 655-666.
45. Tregenza, T., Hack, M.A. and Thompson, D.J. 1996. Relative competitive success of unequal competitors changes with overall density. Oikos, 77: 158-162.
46. Tyler, J.A. and Gilliam, J.F. 1995. Ideal free distributions of stream fish: a model and test with minnows, Rhinicthys atratulus. Ecology, 76: 580-592.
47. Tyler, J.A. and Rose, K.A. 1997. Effects of individual habitat selection in a heterogeneous environment on fish cohort survivorship: a modelling analysis. J. Anim. Ecol., 66: 122-136.
48. Utne, A.C.W., Brannas, E. and Magnhagen, C. 1997. Individual responses to predation risk and food density in perch (Perca fluviatilis L.). Can. J. Zool., 75: 2027-2035.
49. Van Baalen, M. and Sabelis, M.W. 1999. Nonequilibrium population dynamics of 'ideal and free' prey and predators. Am. Nat., 154: 69-88.
50. Vandermeer, J. and Ens, B.J. 1997. Models of interference and their consequences for the spatial distribution of ideal and free predators. J. Anim. Ecol., 66: 846-858.
51. Ward, J.F., Austin, R.M. and MacDonald, D.W. 2000. A simulation model of foraging behaviour : and the effect of predation risk. J. Anim. Ecol., 69: 16-30.