Predator and prey space use: Dragonflies and tadpoles in an interactive game

Ecology

Volumn 88, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 1525-1535

  Hammond, John I ^a   Luttbeg, Barney ^a   Sih, Andrew ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Amphibian larvae; Antipredator behavior; Behavioral response race; Game theory; Ideal free distributions; Invertebrate predators; Model selection; Patch use; Predator; Predator prey foraging games; Prey

Indexed keywords

AMPHIBIAN; AVOIDANCE REACTION; BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY; ECOLOGICAL MODELING; FLY; GAME THEORY; LARVA; MOVEMENT; PREDATOR; PREDATOR-PREY INTERACTION; SPACE USE; SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION; TROPHIC LEVEL;

AMPHIBIA; ANISOPTERA (DRAGONFLIES); INVERTEBRATA;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BEHAVIOR; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; DEMOGRAPHY; ECOSYSTEM; ENVIRONMENT; FOOD CHAIN; FROGS AND TOADS; GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT AND AGING; INSECT; LARVA; PHYSIOLOGY; POPULATION DYNAMICS; PREDATION;

ANIMALS; ANURA; DEMOGRAPHY; ECOSYSTEM; ENVIRONMENT; FOOD CHAIN; INSECTS; LARVA; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; POPULATION DYNAMICS; PREDATORY BEHAVIOR; SPATIAL BEHAVIOR;

EID: 34547633805     PISSN: 00129658     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1890/06-1236     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Abrahams, M. V. 1986. Patch choice under perceptual constraints: a cause for departure from an ideal free distribution. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 19:409-415.
2. Abrams, P. 1980. Some comments on measuring niche overlap. Ecology 61:44-49.
3. Abrams, P. A., and L. R. Ginzburg. 2000. The nature of predation: prey dependent, ratio dependent or neither? Trends in Ecology and Evolution 15:337-341.
4. Alonzo, S. H. 2002. State-dependent habitat selection games between predators and prey: the importance of behavioural interactions and expected lifetime reproductive success. Evolutionary Ecology Research 4:759-778.
5. Benoit-Bird, K. J., and W. W. L. Au. 2003. Prey dynamics affect foraging by pelagic predator (Stenella longirostris) over a range of spatial and temporal scales. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 53:364-373.
6. Bouskila, A. 2001. A habitat selection game of interactions between rodents and their predators. Annales Zoologici Fennici 38:55-70.
7. Brown, J. S., B. P. Kotler, and A. Bouskila. 2001. Ecology of fear: foraging games between predators and prey with pulsed resources. Annales Zoologici Fennici 38:71-87.
8. Burnham, K. P., and D. R. Anderson. 1998. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretical approach. Springer, New York, New York, USA.
9. Formanowicz, D. R., Jr., and M. S. Bobka. 1989. Predation risk and microhabitat preference: an experimental study of the behavioral responses of prey and predator. American Midland Naturalist 121:379-386.
10. Fretwell, S. D., and H. L. Lucas. 1969. On territorial behaviour and other factors influencing habitat distribution in birds. I. Theoretical development. Acta Biotheoretica 19:16-36.
11. Heithaus, M. R. 2001. Habitat selection by predators and prey in communities with asymmetrical intraguild predation. Oikos 92:542-554.
12. Hilborn, R., and M. Mangel. 1997. The ecological detective. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.
13. Hugie, D. M., and L. M. Dill. 1994. Fish and game: a game theoretic approach to habitat selection by predators and prey. Journal of Fish Biology 45:151-169.
14. Kacelnik, A., J. R. Krebs, and C. Bernstein. 1992. The ideal free distribution and predator-prey populations. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 7:50-55.
15. Kennedy, M., and R. D. Gray. 1993. Can ecological theory predict the distribution of foraging animals? A critical analysis of experiments on the ideal free distribution. Oikos 68:158-166.
16. Kotler, B. P. 1984. Risk of predation and the structure of desert rodent communities. Ecology 65:689-701.
17. Kotler, B. P., J. S. Brown, A. Bouskila, S. Mukherjee, and T. Goldberg. 2004. Foraging games between gerbils and their predators: seasonal changes in schedules of activity and apprehension. Israel Journal of Zoology 50:255-271.
18. Kotler, B. P., J. S. Brown, S. R. X. Dall, S. Gresser, D. Ganey, and A. Bouskila. 2002. Foraging games between owls and gerbils: temporal dynamics of resource depletion and apprehension in gerbils. Evolutionary Ecology Research 4:495-518.
19. Krebs, C. J. 1999. Ecological methodology. Second edition. Addison Wesley Longman, Menlo Park, California, USA.
20. Krivan, V. 1997. Dynamic ideal free distribution: effects of optimal patch choice on predator-prey dynamics. American Naturalist 149:164-178.
21. Krivan, V., and O. J. Schmitz. 2003. Adaptive foraging and flexible food web topology. Evolutionary Ecology Research 5:623-652.
22. Lima, S. L. 2002. Putting predators back into behavioral-predator-prey interactions. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 17:70-75.
23. Lima, S. L., and L. M. Dill. 1990. Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. Canadian Journal of Zoology 68:619-640.
24. Luttbeg, B., and T. A. Langen. 2004. Comparing alternative models to empirical data: cognitive models of western scrub-jay foraging behavior. American Naturalist 163:263-276.
25. Luttbeg, B., and A. Sih. 2004. Predator and prey habitat selection games: the effects of how prey balance foraging and predation risk. Israel Journal of Zoology 50:233-254.
26. Monteith, L. G. 1958. Influence of food plant of host on attractiveness of host to tachinid parasites with notes on preimaginal conditioning. Canadian Entomologist 90:478-482.
27. Morris, D. W. 2004. Some crucial consequences of adaptive habitat selection by predators and prey: apparent mutualisms, competitive ghosts, habitat abandonment, and spatial structure. Israel Journal of Zoology 50:207-232.
28. Murdoch, W. W., and A. Stewart-Oaten. 1989. Aggregation by parasitoids and predators: effects on equilibrium and stability. American Naturalist 134:288-310.
29. Read, D. P., P. Feeny, and R. B. Root. 1970. Habitat selection by the aphid parasite Diaeretiella rapae. Canadian Entomologist 102:1567-1578.
30. Rosenheim, J. A. 2004. Top predators constrain the habitat selection games played by intermediate predators and their prey. Israel Journal of Zoology 50:129-138.
31. Sih, A. 1984. The behavioral response race between predator and prey. American Naturalist 123:143-150.
32. Sih, A. 1998. Game theory and predator-prey response races. Pages 221-238 in L. A. Dugatkin and H. K. Reeve, editors. Advances in game theory and the study of animal behavior. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
33. Sih, A. 2005. Predator-prey space use as an emergent outcome of a behavioral response race. Pages 240-255 in P. Barbosa and I. Castellanos, editors. The ecology of predator-prey interactions. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
34. Stephens, D., and J. R. Krebs. 1986. Foraging theory. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.
35. Stiling, P. D. 1987. The frequency of density dependence in insect host-parasitoid systems. Ecology 68:844-856.
36. Sutherland, W. J. 1983. Aggregation and the 'ideal free' distribution. Journal of Animal Ecology 52:821-828.
37. Thomas, C. D. 1989. Predator-herbivore interactions and the escape of isolated plants from phytophagous insects. Oikos 55:291-298.
38. van Balaan, M., and M. W. Sabelis. 1993. Coevolution of patch selection strategies of predator and prey and the consequences for ecological stability. American Naturalist 142:646-670.
39. van Balaan, M., and M. W. Sabelis. 1999. Nonequilibrium population dynamics of "ideal and free" prey and predators. American Naturalist 154:69-88.
40. Vinson, S. B. 1985. The behavior of parasitoids. Pages 417-469 in G. A. Kerkut and L. I. Gilberg, editors. Comprehensive insect physiology, biochemistry, and pharmacology. Pergamon Press Oxford, UK.
41. Walde, S. J., and W. W. Murdoch. 1988. Spatial density-dependence in parasitoids. Annual Review of Entomology 33:441-466.