The interaction between predation and competition

Nature

Volumn 456, Issue 7219, 2008, Pages 235-238

  Chesson, Peter ^a   Kuang, Jessica J ^a  

^a University of Arizona   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPETITION (ECOLOGY); CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT; ECOLOGICAL MODELING; PREDATION; SPECIES DIVERSITY; TROPHIC INTERACTION; TROPHIC LEVEL;

ARTICLE; COMPETITION; ECOLOGY; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; PREDATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE;

EID: 56249126440     PISSN: 00280836     EISSN: 14764687     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nature07248     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Chase, J. M. et al. The interaction between predation and competition: a review and synthesis. Ecol. Lett. 5, 302-315 (2002).
2. Holt, R. D. Spatial heterogeneity, indirect interactions, and the coexistence of prey species. Am. Nat. 124, 377-406 (1984).
3. Kotler, B. P. & Holt, R. D. Predation and competition: the interaction of two types of species interactions. Oikos 54, 256-260 (1989).
4. Grover, J. P. & Holt, R. D. Disentangling resource and apparent competition: realistic models for plant-herbivore communities. J. Theor. Biol. 191, 353-376 (1998).
5. Krivan, V. Competitive co-existence by adaptive predators. Evol. Ecol. Res. 5, 1163-1182 (2003).
6. MacArthur, R. Species packing and competitive equilibrium for many species. Theor. Popul. Biol. 1, 1-11 (1970).
7. Chesson, P. MacArthur's consumer-resource model. Theor. Popul. Biol. 37, 26-38 (1990).
8. Chesson, P. Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 31, 343-366 (2000).
9. Chesson, P. & Huntly, N. The roles of harsh and fluctuating conditions in the dynamics of ecological communities. Am. Nat. 150, 519-553 (1997).
10. Holt, R. D., Grover, J. & Tilman, D. Simple rules for interspecific dominance in systems with exploitative and apparent competition. Am. Nat. 144, 741-771 (1994).
11. Abrams, P. A. High competition with low similarity and low competition with high similarity: exploitative and apparent competition in consumer-resource systems. Am. Nat. 152, 114-128 (1998).
12. Chesson, P. in Unity in Diversity: Reflections on Ecology after the Legacy of Ramon Margalef (eds Valladares, F. et al.) 119-164 (Fundacion BBVA, 2008).
13. Holt, R. D. Predation, apparent competition, and the structure of prey communities. Theor. Popul. Biol. 12, 197-229 (1977).
14. Haygood, R. Coexistence in MacArthur-style consumer-resource models. Theor. Popul. Biol. 61, 215-223 (2002).
15. Kuang, J. J. & Chesson, P. Predation-competition interactions for seasonally recruiting species. Am. Nat. 171, E119-E133 (2008).
16. Hutchinson, G. E. Homage to Santa Rosalia or why are there so many kinds of animals? Am. Nat. 93, 145-159 (1959).
17. Kuang, J. J. & Chesson, P. Coexistence of annual plants: generalist seed predation weakens the storage effect. Ecology. (in the press).
18. Soule, M. E. & Terborgh, J. Conserving nature at regional and continental scales - a scientific program for North America. Bioscience 49, 809-817 (1999).
19. Sala, E. Top predators provide insurance against climate change. Trends Ecol. Evol. 21, 479-480 (2006).
20. Schmitz, O. J. Predators have large effects on ecosystem properties by changing plant diversity, not plant biomass. Ecology 87, 1432-1437 (2006).
21. Johnson, C. N., Isaac, J. L. & Fisher, D. O. Rarity of a top predator triggers continent-wide collapse of mammal prey: dingoes and marsupials in Australia. Proc. R. Soc. B 274, 341-346 (2007).
22. Borrvall, C. & Ebenman, B. Early onset of secondary extinctions in ecological communities following the loss of top predators. Ecol. Lett. 9, 435-442 (2006).
23. Myers, R. A., Baum, J. K., Shepherd, T. D., Powers, S. P. & Peterson, C. H. Cascading effects of the loss of apex predatory sharks from a coastal ocean. Science 315, 1846-1850 (2007).
24. Heithaus, M. R., Frid, A., Wirsing, A. J. & Worm, B. Predicting ecological consequences of marine top predator declines. Trends Ecol. Evol. 23, 202-210 (2008).