Layering, the effective density of mussels and mass-density boundary curves

Oikos

Volumn 110, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 186-190

  Guinez R ^a,b   Petraitis, P S ^c   Castilla, J C ^d  

^a UNIVERSIDAD DE ANTOFAGASTA   (Chile)

^b Center for Advanced Studies in Ecology and Biodiversity   (Chile)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^d PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE CHILE   (Chile)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIVALVE; POPULATION DENSITY; SELF THINNING;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 20444408435     PISSN: 00301299     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.0030-1299.2005.13870.x     Document Type: Review

References (53)

1. Alunno-Bruscia, M., Petraitis, P. S., Bourget, E. et al. 2000. Body size-density relationship for Mytilus edulis in an experimental food-regulated situation. - Oikos 90: 28-42.
2. Alvarado, J. L. and Castilla, J. C. 1996. Tridimensional matrices of Perumytilus purpuratus on intertidal platforms with varying wave forces in central Chile. - Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 133: 135-141.
3. Ardisson, P. L. and Bourget, E. 1991. Abundance, growth, and production estimation of the blue mussel Mytilus edulis on moored navigation buoys in the estuary and northwestern Gulf of St. Lawrence. - Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 48: 2408-2419.
4. Armstrong, J. D. 1997. Self-thinning in juvenile sea trout and other salmonid fishes revisited. - J. Anim. Ecol. 66: 519-526.
5. Begon, M., Fairbanks, L. and Wall, R. 1986. Is there a self-thinning rule for animal populations? - Oikos 46: 122-124.
6. Belgrano, A., Allen, A. P., Enquist, B. J. et al. 2002. Allometric scaling of maximum population density: a common rule for marine phytoplankton and terrestrial plants. - Ecol. Lett. 5: 611-613.
7. Bertness, M. D. and Grosholz, E. D. 1985. Population dynamics of the ribbed mussel, Geukensia demissa: the costs and benefits of an aggregated distribution. - Oecologia 67: 192-204.
8. Bertness, M. D., Gaines, S. D. and Yeh, S. M. 1998. Making mountains out of barnacles: the dynamics of acorn barnacle hummocking. - Ecology 79: 1382-1394.
9. Bohlin, T., Delleford, C., Faremo, U. et al. 1994. The energetics equivalence hypothesis and the relation between population density and body size in stream-living salmonids. - Am. Nat. 143: 478-493.
10. Brown, J. H. and West, G. B. 2000. Scaling in biology. - Oxford Univ. Press.
11. Castilla, J. C., Guiñez, R., Alvarado, J. L. et al. 2000. Distribution, population structure, population biomass and morphological characteristics of the tunicate Pyura stolonifera in the bay of Antofagasta, Chile. - P. S. Z. N. Mar. Ecol. 21: 161-174.
12. Dalby, J. E. 1995. Consequences of aggregated living in the ascidian Pyura stolonifera: evidence for non-contact intraspecific competition. - Mar. Freshwater Res. 46: 1195-1199.
13. Damuth, J. 1981. Home range, home range overlap, and species energy use among herbivorous mammals. - Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 15: 185-193.
14. Dodds, P. S., Rothman, D. H. and Weitz, J. S. 2001. Re-examination of the "3/4-law" of metabolism. - J. Theor. Biol. 209: 9-27.
15. Dunham, J. B. and Vinyard, G. L. 1997. Relationships between body mass, population density, and the self-thinning rule in stream-living salmonids. - Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 54: 1025-1030.
16. Elliott, J. M. 1993. The self-thinning rule applied to juvenile sea-trout, Salmo trutta. - J. Anim. Ecol. 62: 371-379.
17. Fréchette, M. and Bourget, E. 1985a. Energy flow between the pelagic and benthic zones: factors controlling particulate matter available to an intertidal mussel bed. - Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 42: 1158-1165.
18. Fréchette, M. and Bourget, E. 1985b. Food-limited growth of Mytilus edulis L. in relation to the benthic boundary layer. - Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 42: 1166-1170.
19. Fréchette, M. and Lefaivre, D. 1990. Discriminating between food and space limitation in benthic suspension feeders using self-thinning relationships. - Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 65: 15-23.
20. Fréchette, M., Aitken, M. and Page, L. 1992. Interdependence of food and space limitation of a benthic suspension feeder: consequences for self-thinning relationships. - Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 83: 55-62.
21. Fréchette, M., Bergeron, P. and Gagnon, P. 1996. On the use of self-thinning relationships in stocking experiments. - Aquaculture 145: 91-112.
22. Grant, J. W. A. 1993. Self-thinning in stream-dwelling salmonids. - In: Cuting, R. E. (ed.), Production of juvenile Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar, in natural waters. Can. Spec. Publ. Fish. Aquat. Sci, pp. 99-102.
23. Grant, J. and Kramer, D. L. 1990. Territory size as a predictor of the upper limit to population density of juvenile salmonids in streams. - Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 47: 1724-1737.
24. Griffiths, C. L. and Hockey, P. A. R. 1987. A model describing the interactive roles of predation, competition and tidal elevation in structuring mussel populations. - S. Afr. J. Mar. Sci. 5: 547-556.
25. Guiñez, R. and Castilla, J. C. 1999. A tridimensional self-thinning model for multilayered intertidal mussels. - Am. Nat. 154: 341-357.
26. Guiñez, R. and Castilla, J. C. 2001. An allometric tridimensional model of self-thinning for a gregarious tunicate. - Ecology 82: 2331-2341.
27. Hagihara, A. 1999. Theorical considerations on the C-D effect in self-thining plant population. - Res. Popul. Ecol. 41: 151-159.
28. Hosomi, A. 1985. On the persistent trend of constant biomass and the constant total occupation area of the mussel Mytilus galloprovincialis (Lamarck). - Venus Jpn. J. Malacol. (Kairuigaku Zasshi) 44: 33-48.
29. Hughes, R. N. and Griffiths, C. L. 1988. Self-thinning in barnacles and mussels: the geometry of packing. - Am. Nat. 132: 484-491.
30. Keeley, E. R. 2003. An experimental analysis of self-thinning in juvenile steelhead trout. - Oikos 102: 543-550.
31. Kira, T. H., Ogawa, H. and Sakazaki, N. 1953. Intraspecific competition among higher plants. I. Competition-yield density interrelationship in regularly dispersed populations. - J. Biol. Osaka City Univ. 4: 1-16.
32. Latto, J. 1994. Evidence for a self-thinning rule in animals. - Oikos 69: 531-534.
33. Lohse, D. P. 2002. Relative strengths of competition for space and food in a sessile filter feeder. - Biol. Bull. 203: 173-180.
34. Marquet, P. A., Navarrete, S. A. and Castilla, J. C. 1990. Scaling population density to body size in rocky intertidal communities. - Science 250: 1125-1127.
35. McGrorty, S., Clarke, R. T., Reading, C. J. et al. 1990. Population dynamics of the mussel Mytilus edulis: density changes and regulation of the populations in the Exe estuary, Devon. - Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 67: 157-169.
36. Morris, E. C. and Myerscough, P. J. 1985. Nutrient level effects on thinning and non-thinning crowding effects in even aged populations of subterranean clover. - Aust. J. Ecol. 10: 469-479.
37. Norberg, A. 1988a. Self-thinning of plant populations dictated by packing density and individual growth geometry and relationships between animal population density and body mass governed by metabolic rate. - In: Persson, L. (ed.), Size-structured populations: ecology and evolution. Springer, pp. 259-279.
38. Norberg, A. 1988b. Theory of growth geometry of plants and self-thinning of plant populations: geometry similarity, elastic similarity, and different growth modes of plants parts. - Am. Nat. 131: 220-256.
39. Okamura, B. 1986. Group living and effect of spatial position in aggregations of Mytilus edulis. - Oecologia 69: 341-347.
40. Peters, R. H. 1983. The ecological implications of body size. - Cambridge Univ. Press.
41. Petraitis, P. S. 1995. The role of growth in maintaining spatial dominance by mussels (Mytilus edulis). - Ecology 76: 1337-1346.
42. Richardson, C. A. and Seed, R. 1990. Predictions of mussel (Mytilus edulis) biomass on an offshore platform from a single population samples. - Biofouling 2: 289-297.
43. Rincón, P. A. and Lobón-Cerviá, J. 2002. Nonlinear self-thinning in a stream-resident population of brown trout (Salmo trutta). - Ecology 83: 1808-1816.
44. Riveros, A. 2002. Estudio de la calidad ambiental de zonas intermareales en la Bahía San Jorge (II Región-Chile), mediante la evaluación de respuestas biológicas del mitilido Perumytilus purpuratus. - In: Centro EULA. Univ. de Concepción, p. 127.
45. Schmidt-Nielsen, K. 1984. Scaling: why is animal size so important? - Cambridge Univ. Press.
46. Shinozaki, K. and Kira, T. 1956. Intraspecific competition among higher plants. VII. Logistic theory of the C-D effect. - J. Biol. Osaka City Univ. 7: 35-72.
47. Steingrimsson, S. O. and Grant, J. W. A. 1999. Allometry of territory size and metabolic rate as predictors of self-thinning in young-of-the-year Atlantic salmon. - J. Anim. Ecol. 68: 17-26.
48. Stillman, R. A., McGrorty, S., Goss-Custard, J. D. et al. 2000. Predicting mussel population density and age structure: the relationship between model complexity and predictive power. - Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 208: 131-145.
49. Stiven, A. E. and Kuenzler, E. J. 1979. The response of two salt march molluscs, Littorina irrorata and Geukensia demissa, to field manipulations of density and Spartina litter. - Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 49: 151-171.
50. Suchanek, T. H. 1986. Mussels and their role in structuring rocky shore communities. - In: Seed, R. (ed.), The ecology of rocky coasts. Columbia Univ. Press, pp. 70-96.
51. West, G. B., Savage, V. M., Gillooly, J. et al. 2003. Why does metabolic rate scale with body size? - Nature 421: 713-713.
52. Westoby, W. 1984. The self-thinning rule. - Adv. Ecol. Res. 14: 167-226.
53. Xue, L. and Hagihara, A. 1998. Growth analysis of the self-thinning stands of Pinus densiflora Sieb. et Zucc. - Ecol. Res. 13: 183-191.