Effects of defense evolution and diet choice on population dynamics in a one-predator-two-prey system

Ecology

Volumn 86, Issue 9, 2005, Pages 2513-2524

  Yamauchi, Atsushi ^a   Yamamura, Norio ^a  

^a KYOTO UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Defense evolution; One predator two prey system; Optimal diet choice; Population dynamics; Theory

Indexed keywords

POPULATION DYNAMICS; PREDATOR-PREY INTERACTION;

EID: 23944496031     PISSN: 00129658     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1890/04-1524     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Abrams, P. A. 1992a. Adaptive foraging by predators as a cause of predator-prey cycles. Evolutionary Ecology 6:56-72.
2. Abrams, P. A. 1992b. Predators that benefit prey and prey that harm predators: unusual effects of interacting foraging adaptations. American Naturalist 140:573-600.
3. Abrams, P. A. 1999. The adaptive dynamics of consumer choice. American Naturalist 153:83-97.
4. Abrams, P. A., and H. Matsuda. 1993. Effects of adaptive predatory and anti-predator behaviour in a two-prey-one-predator system. Evolutionary Ecology 7:312-326.
5. Abrams, P. A., and H. Matsuda. 1997. Prey adaptation as a cause of predator-prey cycle. Evolution 51:1742-1750.
6. Berec, L., and V. Křivan. 2000. A mechanistic model for partial preference. Theoretical Population Biology 58:279-289.
7. Charnov, E. L. 1976. Optimal foraging: attack strategy of a mantid. American Naturalist 110:141-151.
8. Coleman, J. S., and C. G. Jones. 1991. A phytocentric perspective of phytochemical induced by herbivores. Pages 3-45 in D. W. Tallamy and M. J. Raupp, editors. Phytochemical induction by herbivores. John Wiley and Sons, New York, New York, USA.
9. Comins, H. N., and M. P. Hassell. 1976. Predation in multi-prey communities. Journal of Theoretical Biology 62:93-114.
10. de Jong, T. J. 1995. Why fast-growing plants do not bother about defence. Oikos 74:545-548.
11. de Jong, T. J., and E. van der Meijden. 2000. On the correlation between allocation to defence and regrowth in plants. Oikos 88:503-508.
12. de Mazancourt, C., and M. Loreau. 2000. Grazing optimization, nutrient cycling, and spatial heterogeneity of plant-herbivore interactions: should a palatable plant evolve? Evolution 54:81-92.
13. de Mazancourt, C., M. Loreau, and U. Dieckmann. 2001. Can the evolution of plant defense lead to plant-herbivore mutualism? American Naturalist 158:109-123.
14. Edelstein-Keshet, L., and M. Rausher. 1989. The effects of inducible plant defenses on herbivore populations. 1. Mobile herbivores in continuous time. American Naturalist 133:787-810.
15. Fryxell, J. M., and P. Lundberg. 1994. Diet choice and predator-prey dynamics. Evolutionary Ecology 8:407-421.
16. Genkai-Kato, M., and N. Yamamura. 1999. Unpalatable prey resolves the paradox of enrichment. Proceeding of the Royal Society of London, Series B 266:1215-1219.
17. Genkai-Kato, M., and N. Yamamura. 2000. Profitability of prey determines the response of population abundances to enrichment. Proceeding of the Royal Society of London, Series B 267:2397-2401.
18. Gleeson, S. K., and D. S. Wilson. 1986. Equilibrium diet: optimal foraging and prey coexistence. Oikos 46:139-144.
19. Grover, J. P. 1995. Competition, herbivory, and enrichment: nutrient-based models for edible and in edible plants. American Naturalist 145:746-774.
20. Holt, R. D. 1977. Predation, apparent competition, and the structure of prey communities. Theoretical Population Biology 12:197-229.
21. Holt, R. D. 1983. Optimal foraging and the form of the predation isocline. American Naturalist 122:521-541.
22. Holt, R. D., and B. P. Kotler. 1987. Short-term apparent competition. American Naturalist 130:412-430.
23. Holt, R. D., and J. H. Lawton. 1994. The ecological consequences of shared natural enemies. Annual Reviews of Ecology and Systematics 25:495-520.
24. Hutson, V. 1984. Predator mediated coexistence with a switching predator. Mathematical Biosciences 68:233-246.
25. Iwasa, Y., T. Kubo, N. van Dam, and T. de Jong. 1996. Optimal level of chemical defense decreasing with leaf age. Theoretical Population Biology 50:124-148.
26. Iwasa, Y., A. Pomiankowski, and S. Nee. 1991. The evolution of costly mate preferences. II. The "handicap principle." Evolution 45:1431-1442.
27. Karban, R., and J. Kuć. 1999. Induced resistance against pathogens and herbivores: an overview. Pages 1-16 in A. A. Agrawal, S. Tuzun, and E. Bent, editors. Induced plant defenses against pathogens and herbivores. ASP Press, St. Paul, Minnesota, USA.
28. Křivan, V. 1996. Optimal foraging and predator-prey dynamics. Theoretical Population Biology 49:265-290.
29. Křivan, V. 1998. Effects of optimal antipredator behavior of prey on predator-prey dynamics: the role of refuges. Theoretical Population Biology 53:131-142.
30. Křivan, V., and A. Sikder. 1999. Optimal foraging and predator-prey dynamics, II. Theoretical Population Biology 55: 111-126.
31. Leibold, M. A. 1989. Resource edibility and the effects of predators and productivity on the outcome of trophic interactions. American Naturalist 134:922-949.
32. Leibold, M. A. 1996. A graphical model of keystone predators in food webs: trophic regulation of abundance, incidence, and diversity patterns in communities. American Naturalist 147:784-812.
33. Loreau, M., and C. de Mazancourt. 1999. Should plants in resource-poor environment invest more in antiherbivore defence? Oikos 87:195-200.
34. Matsuda, H. 1985. Evolutionarily stable strategies fro predation switching. Journal of Theoretical Biology 115:351-366.
35. Matsuda, H., P. A. Abrams, and M. Hori. 1993. The effect of adaptive anti-predator behavior on exploitative competition and mutualism between predators. Oikos 68:549-559.
36. Mukherjee, D., and A. B. Roy. 1998. On local(ly) ESS of a pair of prey-predator system with predatory switching. Mathematical Biosciences 151:165-177.
37. Murdoch, W. W. 1969. Switching in general predators: experiments on predator specificity and stability of prey populations. Ecological Monographs 39:335-354.
38. Murdoch, W. W. 1977. Stabilizing effects of spatial heterogeneity in predator-prey systems. Theoretical Population Biology 11:252-2773.
39. Murdoch, W. W., and A. Oaten. 1975. Predation and population stability. Advances in Ecological Research 9:1-131.
40. Stephens, D. W., and J. R. Krebs. 1986. Foraging theory. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.
41. Stockwell, C. A., A. P. Hendry, and M. T. Kinnison. 2003. Contemporary evolution meets conservation biology. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 18:94-101.
42. Tansky, M. 1978. Switching effect in prey-predator system. Journal of Theoretical Biology 70:263-271.
43. Teramoto, E., K. Kawasaki, and N. Shigesada. 1979. Switching effect of predation on competitive prey species. Journal of Theoretical Biology 79:303-315.
44. Underwood, N. 1999. The influence of plant and herbivore characteristics on the interaction between induced resistance and herbivore population dynamics. American Naturalist 153:282-294.
45. van Baalen, M., V. Křivan, P. C. J. van Rijn, and M. W. Sabelis. 2001. Alternative food, switching predators, and the persistence of predator-prey systems. American Naturalist 157:512-524.
46. Vance, R. R. 1978. Predation and resource partitioning in one-predator-two-prey model communities. American Naturalist 112:797-813.
47. Yamamura, N., and N. Tsuji. 1995. Optimal strategy of plant antiherbivore defense: implications for apparency and resource-availability theories. Ecological Research 10:19-30.
48. Yearsley, J. M. 2003. Optimal diet selection, frequency dependence and prey renewal. Theoretical Population Biology 64:129-139.
49. Yoshida, T., L. E. Jones, S. P. Ellner, G. F. Fussmann, and N. G. Hairston, Jr. 2003. Rapid evolution drives ecological dynamics in a predator-prey system. Nature 424:303-306.