Sink habitats can alter ecological outcomes for competing species

Journal of Animal Ecology

Volumn 74, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 995-1004

  Schreiber, Sebastian J ^a   Kelton, Molly ^b,c  

^a The College of William and Mary   (United States)

^b VASSAR COLLEGE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF UTAH   (United States)

Author keywords

Competition; Population dynamics; Sink mediated coexistence

Indexed keywords

BREEDING SITE; COEXISTENCE; COMPETITION (ECOLOGY); DOMINANCE;

EID: 33845541574     PISSN: 00218790     EISSN: 13652656     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2005.00996.x     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Amarasekare, P. & Nisbet, R.M. (2001) Spatial heterogeneity, source-sink dynamics, and the local coexistence of competing 2 species. American Naturalist, 158, 572-584.
2. Amezcua, A.B. & Holyoak, M. (2000) Empirical evidence for predator-prey source-sink dynamics. Ecology, 81, 43087-43098.
3. Boughton, D.A. (1999) Empirical evidence for complex source-sink dynamics with alternative states in a butterfly metapopulation. Ecology, 8, 2727-2739.
4. Dias, P.C. (1996) Sources and sinks in population biology. TREE, 11, 326-330.
5. Donovan, T.M., Thompson, F.R., Faaborg, J. & Probst, J.R. (1995) Reproductive success of migratory birds in habitat sources and sinks. Conservation Biology, 00, 000-000.
6. Fauth, P.T. (2001) Wood thrush populations are not all sinks in the agricultural midwestern United States. Conservation Biology, 15, 523-527.
7. Foppen, P.R. & Chardon, P.J. & Liefveld, W. (2000) Understanding the role of sink patches in source-sink metapopulations: reed warbler in an agricultural landscape. Conservation Biology, 14, 1881-1892.
8. Franke, J.E. & Yakubu, A.-A. (1993) Species extinction using geometry of level surfaces. Nonlinear Analysis, 21, 369-378.
9. Holt, R.D. (1985) Population dynamics in two patch environments: some anomalous consequences of optimal habitat distribution, Theoretical Population Biology, 28, 181-208.
10. Holt, R.D. (1997) On the evolutionary stability of sink populations. Evolutionary Ecology, 11, 723-731.
11. Holt, R.D.J., Grover & Tilman, D. (1994) Simple rules for interspecifc dominance in systems with exploitative and apparent competition. American Naturalist, 144, 741-771.
12. Jansen, V.A.A. & Yoshimura, J. (1998) Populations can persist in an environment consisting of sink habitats only. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 95, 3696-3698.
13. Murphy, M.T. (2001) Source-sink dynamics of a declining eastern kingbird population and the value of sink habitats. Conservation Biology, 15, 737-748.
14. Pulliam, H.R. (1988) Sources, sinks, and population regulation. American Naturalist, 132, 652-661.
15. Pulliam, H.R. (1996) Population dynamics in ecological space and time. Sources and Sinks: Empirical Evidence and Population Consequences, pp. 45-69. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
16. Pulliam, H.R. & Danielson, B.J. (1991) Sources, sinks and habitat selection: a landscape perspective on population 1 dynamics. American Naturalist, 137 (Suppl.), S50-S66.
17. Remeš, V. (2000) How can maladaptive habitat choice generate source-sink population dynamics? Oikos, 91, 579-582.
18. Rosenheim, J.A. (2001) Source-sink dynamics for a generalist insect predator in habitats with strong higher-order predation. Ecology Monographs, 71, 93-116.
19. Smith, H.L. & Thieme, H.R. (2001) Stable coexistence and bi-stability for competitive systems on ordered Banach spaces. Journal of Differential Equations, 176, 195-222.
20. Tilman, D. (1982) Resource Competition and Community Structure. Monographs in Population Biology, Vol. 17. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
21. With, K.A. & King, A.W. (2001) Analysis of landscape sources and sinks: the effect of spatial pattern on avian demography. Biological Conservation, 100, 75-88.