Coexistence of cycling and dispersing consumer species: Armstrong and McGehee in space

American Naturalist

Volumn 165, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 193-205

  Wilson, William G ^a   Abrams, Peter A ^b  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Coexistence; Competition; Consumer resource cycle; Cycles; Dispersal; Predator prey model; Spatial model

Indexed keywords

COEXISTENCE; COMPETITION (ECOLOGY); POPULATION MODELING; PREDATOR-PREY INTERACTION; SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; COMPETITIVE BEHAVIOR; FOOD CHAIN; POPULATION DENSITY; POPULATION DYNAMICS; POPULATION MIGRATION; PREDATION;

ANIMAL MIGRATION; ANIMALS; COMPETITIVE BEHAVIOR; FOOD CHAIN; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; POPULATION DENSITY; POPULATION DYNAMICS; PREDATORY BEHAVIOR;

EID: 13944265092     PISSN: 00030147     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/427733     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Abrams, P. A. 2004. When does periodic variation in resource growth allow robust coexistence of competing consumer species? Ecology 85:372-382.
2. Abrams, P. A., and R. D. Holt. 2002. The impact of consumer-resource cycles on the coexistence of competing consumers. Theoretical Population Biology 62:281-295.
3. Abrams, P. A., and W. G. Wilson. 2004. Coexistence in metacommunities due to spatial variation in resource growth rates: does R* predict the outcome of competition? Ecology Letters 7:929-940.
4. Abrams, P. A., C. Hill, and R. Elmgren. 1990. The functional response of the predatory polychaete, Harmothoe sarsi to the amphipod, Pontoporeia affinis. Oikos 59:261-269.
5. Abrams, P. A., C. D. Brassil, and R. D. Holt. 2003. Dynamics and responses to mortality rates of competing predators undergoing predator-prey cycles. Theoretical Population Biology 64:163-176.
6. Amarasekare, P., and R. M. Nisbet. 2001. Spatial heterogeneity, source-sink dynamics, and the local coexistence of competing species. American Naturalist 158:572-584.
7. Anderies, J. M., and B. E. Beisner. 2000. Fluctuating environments and phytoplankton community structure: a stochastic model. American Naturalist 155:556-569.
8. Armstrong, R. A. 1976. Fugitive species: experiments with fungi and some theoretical considerations. Ecology 57:953-963.
9. Armstrong, R. A., and R. McGehee. 1976a. Coexistence of species competing for shared resources. Theoretical Population Biology 9:317-328.
10. _. 1976b. Coexistence of two competitors on one resource. Journal of Theoretical Biology 56:499-502.
11. _. 1980. Competitive exclusion. American Naturalist 115:151-170.
12. Bolker, B. M., and S. W. Pacala. 1999. Spatial moment equations for plant competition: understanding spatial strategies and the advantages of short dispersal. American Naturalist 153:575-602.
13. Chesson, P. 1994. Multispecies competition in variable environments. Theoretical Population Biology 45:227-276.
14. _. 2000. Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 31:343-366.
15. de Roos, A. M., E. McCauley, and W. G. Wilson. 1991. Mobility versus density-limited predator-prey dynamics on different spatial scales. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 246:117-122.
16. _. 1998. Pattern formation and the spatial scale of interaction between predators and their prey. Theoretical Population Biology 53:108-130.
17. Durrett, R., and S. A. Levin. 1998. Spatial aspects of interspecific competition. Theoretical Population Biology 53:30-43.
18. Eby, L. A., L. G. Rudstam, and J. F. Kitchell. 1995. Predator responses to prey population dynamics-an empirical analysis based on lake trout growth rates. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 52:1564-1571.
19. Gross, J. E., L. A. Shipley, N. T. Hobbs, D. E. Spalinger, and B. A. Wunder. 1993. Functional response of herbivores in food-concentrated patches: tests of a mechanistic model. Ecology 74:778-791.
20. Grover, J. P. 1990. Resource competition in a variable environment: phytoplankton growing according to Monods model. American Naturalist 136:771-789.
21. _. 1991. Resource competition in a variable environment: phytoplankton growing according to the variable-internal-stores model. American Naturalist 138:811-835.
22. _. 1997. Resource competition. Chapman & Hall, New York.
23. Hassell, M. P. 1978. The dynamics of arthropod predator-prey systems. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
24. Holling, C. S. 1959. The components of predation as revealed by a study of small mammal predation of the European pine sawfly. Canadian Entomologist 91:293-320.
25. Holmes, E., and H. Wilson. 1998. Running from trouble: long-distance dispersal and the competitive coexistence of inferior species. American Naturalist 151:578-586.
26. Hsu, S. B., S. P. Hubbell, and P. Waltman. 1978. A contribution to the theory of competing predators. Ecological Monographs 48:337-349.
27. Huisman, J., and F. Weissing. 2001. Biological conditions for oscillations and chaos generated by multispecies competition. Ecology 82:2682-2695.
28. Jansen, V. A. A. 2001. The dynamics of two diffusively coupled predator-prey populations. Theoretical Population Biology 59:119-131.
29. Jansen, V. A. A., and A. de Roos. 2000. The role of space in reducing predator-prey cycles. Pages 183-201 in U. Dieckmann, R. Law, and J. A. J. Metz, eds. The geometry of ecological interactions: simplifying spatial complexity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
30. Jansen, V. A. A., and A. Lloyd. 2000. Local stability analysis of spatially homogeneous solutions of multi-patch systems. Journal of Mathematical Biology 41:232-252.
31. King, A. A., and A. Hastings. 2003. Spatial mechanisms for coexistence of species sharing a common natural enemy. Theoretical Population Biology 64:431-438.
32. Koch, A. L. 1974. Competitive coexistence of two predators utilizing the same prey under constant environmental conditions. Journal of Theoretical Biology 44:387-395.
33. Lande, R., S. Engen, and B.-E. Saether. 2003. Stochastic population dynamics in ecology and conservation. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
34. McCauley, E., W. G. Wilson, and A. M. de Roos. 1993. Dynamics of age-structured and spatially structured predator-prey interactions: individual-based models and population level formulations. American Naturalist 142:412-442.
35. McGehee, R., and R. A. Armstrong. 1977. Some mathematical problems concerning the ecological principle of competitive exclusion. Journal of Differential Equations 29:214-234.
36. Messier, F. 1994. Ungulate population models with predation: a case study with the North American moose. Ecology 75:478-488.
37. Namba, T., and C. Hashimoto. 2004. Dispersal-mediated coexistence of competing predators. Theoretical Population Biology 66:53-70.
38. Ruesink, J. L. 1997. Variation in per capita interaction strength: thresholds due to nonlinear dynamics and nonequilibrium conditions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 95:6843-6847.
39. Stewart, F. M., and B. R. Levin. 1973. Partitioning of resources and the outcome of interspecific competition: a model and some general considerations. American Naturalist 107:171-198.
40. Tilman, D., and P. Kareiva, eds. 1997. Spatial ecology. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
41. Wilson, W. G. 1996. Lotka's game in predator-prey theory: linking populations to individuals. Theoretical Population Biology 50:368-393.
42. _. 1998. Resolving discrepancies between deterministic population models and individual-based simulations. American Naturalist 151:116-134.
43. Wilson, W. G., A. M. de Roos, and E. McCauley. 1993. Spatial instabilities within the diffusive Lotka-Volterra system: individual-based simulation results. Theoretical Population Biology 43:91-127.
44. Wilson, W. G., C. W. Osenberg, R. Schmitt, and R. M. Nisbet. 1999. Complementary foraging behaviors allow coexistence of two consumers. Ecology 80:2358-2372.