Avoid your neighbours: Size-determined spatial distribution patterns among northern pike individuals

Oikos

Volumn 113, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 251-258

  Nilsson, P Anders ^a  

^a LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANNIBALISM; COMPETITION (ECOLOGY); INTERSPECIFIC INTERACTION; INTRASPECIFIC INTERACTION; PISCIVORE; PREDATOR-PREY INTERACTION; SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION;

ANIMALIA; ESOX LUCIUS;

EID: 33646862144     PISSN: 00301299     EISSN: 16000706     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.2006.0030-1299.14555.x     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Abrams P. A.. 1994. Should prey overestimate the risk of predation? Am. Nat. 144 : 317 328.
2. Bascompte J. Solé R. V.. 1998. Spatiotemporal patterns in nature Trends Ecol. Evol. 13 : 173 174.
3. Begon M. Harper J. L. Townsend C. R.. 1990. Ecology: individuals, populations and communities. Blackwell Scientific Publications.
4. Brown R. S. Cooke S. J. Anderson W. G. et al. 1999. Evidence to challenge the "2% rule" for biotelemetry N. Am. J. Fish. Manage. 19 : 867 871.
5. Bry C. Basset E. Rognon X. et al. 1992. Analysis of sibling cannibalism among pike, Esox lucius, juveniles reared under semi-natural conditions Environ. Biol. Fish. 35 : 75 84.
6. Crowder L. B. Cooper W. E.. 1982. Habitat structural complexity and the interaction between bluegills and their prey Ecology 63 : 1802 1813.
7. Day M. D. Zalucki M. P.. 2000. Effect of density on spatial distribution, pit formation and pit diameter of Myrmelon acer Walker, (Neuroptera: Myrmeleontidae): patterns and processes Austral. Ecol. 25 : 58 64.
8. Ebenman B. Persson L.. 1988. Size-structured populations. Springer-Verlag.
9. Elgar M. A. Crespi B. J.. 1992. Cannibalism: ecology and evolution among diverse taxa. Oxford Univ. Press.
10. Fryxell J. M. Lundberg P.. 1998. Individual behavior and community dynamics. Chapman & Hall.
11. Grimm M. P.. 1981. Intraspecific predation as a principal factor controlling the biomass of northern pike (Esox lucius L.) Fish. Manage. 12 : 77 79.
12. Grimm M. P. Klinge M.. 1996. Pike and some aspects of its dependence on vegetation Craig J. F. Pike: biology and exploitation. Chapman & Hall 125 156.
13. Hambright K. D. Drenner R. W. McComas S. R. et al. 1991. Gape-limited piscivores: planktivore size refuges, and the trophic cascade hypothesis Arch. Hydrobiol. 121 : 389 404.
14. Hastings A.. 1990. Spatial heterogeneity and ecological models Ecology 71 : 426 428.
15. Huntingford F. A. Turner A. K.. 1987. Animal conflict. Chapman & Hall.
16. Jenkins T. M. J.. 1969. Social structure, position choice and microdistribution of two trout species (Salmo trutta and Salmo gairdneri) resident in mountain streams Anim. Behav. Monogr. 2 : 57 123.
17. Jepsen N. Beck S. Skov C. et al. 2001. Behavior of pike (Esox lucius L.) >50 cm in a turbid reservoir and in a clearwater lake Ecol. Freshw. Fish 10 : 26 34.
18. Juanes F.. 1994. What determines prey size selectivity in piscivorous fishes? Stouder D. J. Fresh K. L. Feller R. J. Theory and application in fish feeding ecology. Carolina Univ. Press 79 100.
19. Kerfoot W. C. Sih A.. 1987. Predation: direct and indirect impacts on aquatic communities. Univ. Press of New England.
20. Kie J. G. Bowyer R. T. Nicholson M. C. et al. 2002. Landscape heterogeneity at differing scales: effects on spatial distribution of mule deer Ecology 83 : 530 544.
21. Lima S. L. Dill L. M.. 1990. Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus Can. J. Zool. 68 : 619 640.
22. Maitland P. S. Campbell R. N.. 1992. Freshwater fishes. Harper Collins Publishers.
23. Marion G. Swain D. L. Hutchings M. R.. 2005. Understanding foraging behaviour in spatially heterogeneous environments J. Theor. Biol. 232 : 127 142.
24. Murdoch W. W. Briggs C. J. Nisbet R. M.. 2003. Consumer-resource dynamics. Princeton Univ. Press.
25. Nilsson P. A. Brönmark C.. 1999. Foraging among cannibals and kleptoparasites: effects of prey size on pike behavior Behav. Ecol. 10 : 557 566.
26. Nilsson P. A. Brönmark C.. 2000. Prey vulnerability to a gape-size limited predator: behavioural and morphological impacts on northern pike piscivory Oikos 88 : 539 546.
27. Nilsson P. A. Nilsson K. Nyström P.. 2000. Does risk of intraspecific interactions induce shifts in aquatic predators? Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 48 : 268 275.
28. Pettersson L. B. Brönmark C.. 1993. Trading off safety against food: state dependent habitat choice and foraging in crucian carp Oecologia 95 : 353 357.
29. Pitcher T. J. Lang S. H. Turner J. A.. 1988. A risk-balancing trade off between foraging rewards and predation hazard in a shoaling Fish Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 22 : 225 228.
30. Raat, A. J. P. 1988. Synopsis of the biological data on the northern pike, Esox lucius Linnaeus, 1758. - FAO Fish. Synop. No. 30, Rev. 2: 178 p.
31. Scrimgeour G. J. Culp J. M.. 1994. Foraging and evading predators-the effect of predator species on a behavioral trade-off by a lotic mayfly Oikos 69 : 71 79.
32. Skov C. Brodersen J. Brönmark C. et al. 2005. Evaluation of PIT-tagging in cyprinids J. Fish. Biol. 67 : 1195 1201.
33. Smith C. Reay P.. 1991. Cannibalism in teleost fish Rev. Fish Biol. Fish. 1 : 41 64.
34. Tilman D. Kareiva P.. 1997. Spatial ecology: the role of space in population dynamics and interspecific interactions. Princeton Univ. Press.
35. Turchin P.. 1998. Quantitative analysis of movement: measuring and modeling population redistribution in animals and plants. Sinauer Associates, Inc.
36. Tyler J. A. 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.
37. Webb P. W. Skadsen J. M.. 1980. Strike tactics of Esox Can. J. Zool. 58 : 1462 1469.
38. Zar J. H.. 1996. Biostatistical analysis. Prentice-Hall.