Adaptive changes in size and age at metamorphosis can qualitatively vary with predator type and available defenses

Ecology

Volumn 91, Issue 9, 2010, Pages 2756-2768

  Higginson, A D ^a   Ruxton, G D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Dynamic state dependence; Larval growth; Life history plasticity; Maturation; Predator prey interactions; Size preference

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; AGE STRUCTURE; AMPHIBIAN; BODY SIZE; GROWTH RATE; INSECT; LARVA; LIFE HISTORY TRAIT; MATURATION; META-ANALYSIS; METAMORPHOSIS; PREDATION RISK; PREDATOR-PREY INTERACTION; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; REFUGE; SIZE SELECTION;

ADAPTATION; AGING; ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; BODY SIZE; GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT AND AGING; INSECT; METAMORPHOSIS; PHYSIOLOGY; PREDATION;

ADAPTATION, PHYSIOLOGICAL; AGING; ANIMALS; BODY SIZE; INSECTS; METAMORPHOSIS, BIOLOGICAL; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; PREDATORY BEHAVIOR;

AMPHIBIA; HEXAPODA;

EID: 77956608415     PISSN: 00129658     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1890/08-2269.1     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Abrams, P. A., and L. Rowe. 1996. The effects of predation on the age and size of maturity of prey. Evolution 50: 1052-1061.
2. Agrawal, A. F., and R. Karban. 1999. Adaptive status of localized and systematic defense responses in plants. Pages 33-44 in R. Tollrian and C. D. Harvell, editors. The ecology and evolution of inducible defenses. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.
3. Amano, T., R. Nishida, Y. Kuwahara, and H. Fukami. 1999. Pharmocophagous acquisition of clerodendrins by the turnip sawfly (A thalia rosaw ruficornis) and their role in the mating behavior. Chemoecology 9: 145-150.
4. Arnqvist, G., and F. Johansson. 1998. Ontogenetic reaction norms of predator-induced defensive morphology in dragonfly larvae. Ecology 79: 1847-1858. (Pubitemid 28448015)
5. Babbitt, K. J. 2001. Behaviour and growth of southern leopard frog (Rana sphenocephala) tadpoles: effects of food and predation risk. Canadian Journal of Zoology 79: 809-814.
6. Babbitt, K. J., and G. W. Tanner. 1997. Effects of cover and predator identity on predation of Hyla squirella tadpoles. Journal of Herpetology 31: 128-130.
7. Babbitt, K. J., and G. W. Tanner. 1998. Effects of cover and predator size on survival and development of Rana utricularia tadpoles. Oecologia 114: 258-262.
8. Banks, M. J., and D. J. Thompson. 1987. Lifetime reproductive success of females of the damselfly Coenagrion puella. Journal of Animal Ecology 56: 815-832.
9. Barnett, H. K., and J. S. Richardson. 2002. Predation risk and competition effects on the life-history characteristics of larval Oregon spotted frog and larval red-legged frog. Oecologia 132: 436-444.
10. Benard, M. F. 2004. Predator-induced phenotypic plasticity in organisms with complex life histories. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 35: 651-673.
11. Benard, M. F. 2006. Survival trade-offs between two predatorinduced phenotypes in Pacific treefrogs (Pseudacris regilla). Ecology 87: 340-346.
12. Brodie, E. D. J., and D. R. J. Formanowicz. 1983. Prey size preference of predators: differential vulnerability of larval anurans. Herpetologica 39: 67-75.
13. Caldwell, J. P., J. H. Thorp, and T. O. Jervey. 1980. Predatorprey relationships among larval dragonflies, salamanders, and frogs. Oecologia 46: 285-289.
14. Clark, C. W., and M. Mangel. 2000. Dynamic state variable models in ecology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
15. Cooper, S. D., D. W. Smith, and J. R. Bence. 1985. Prey selection by freshwater predators with different foraging strategies. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 42: 1720-1732.
16. Crump, M. L. 1984. Ontogenetic changes in vulnerability to predation in tadpoles of Hyla pseudopuma. Herpetologica 40: 265-271.
17. Dahl, J., and B. Peckarsky. 2003. Developmental responses to predation risk in morphologically defended mayflies. Oecologia 137: 188-194. (Pubitemid 37261616)
18. del Campo, M. L., S. R. Smedley, and T. Eisner. 2005. Reproductive benefits derived from defensive plant alkaloid possession in an arctiid moth (Utethesia ornatrix). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA. 102: 13508-13512.
19. Dodson, S. L. 1974. Adaptive change in plankton morphology in response to size-selective predation: a new hypothesis of cyclomorphosis. Limnology and Oceanography 19: 721-729.
20. Dodson, S. L. 1989. The ecological role of chemical stimuli for the zooplankton: predator-induced morphology in Daphnia. Oecologia 78: 361-367.
21. Eklöv, P., and E. E. Werner. 2000. Multiple predator effects on size-dependent behavior and mortality of two species of anuran larvae. Oikos 88: 250-258.
22. Fischer, K., and K. Fielder. 2002. Reaction norms for age and size at maturity in response to temperature: a test of the compound interest hypothesis. Evolutionary Ecology 16: 333-349.
23. Gabriel, W., B. Luttbeg, A. Sih, and R. Tollrian. 2005. Environmental tolerance, heterogeneity, and the evolution of reversible plastic responses. American Naturalist 166: 339-353. (Pubitemid 41266022)
24. Gilliam, J. F., and D. F. Fraser. 1987. Habitat selection under predation hazard: test of a model with foraging minnows. Ecology 68: 1856-1862.
25. Gotthard, K. 2000. Increased risk of predation as a cost of high growth rate: an experimental test in a butterfly. Journal of Animal Ecology 69: 896-902.
26. Gotthard, K. 2008. Adaptive growth decisions in butterflies. BioScience 58: 222-230.
27. Hirvonen, H., and E. Ranta. 1996. Prey to predator size ratio influences foraging efficiency of larval Aeshna juncea dragonflies. Oecologia 106: 407-415.
28. Houston, A. I., and J. M. McNamara. 1999. Models of adaptive behaviour. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
29. Johansson, F. 2002. Reaction norms and production costs of predator-induced morphological defences in a larval dragonfly (Odonata: Leucorrhinia dubia). Canadian Journal of Zoology 80: 944-950.
30. Kishida, O., and K. Nishimura. 2004. Bulgy tadpoles: inducible defense morph. Oecologia 140: 414-421. (Pubitemid 39147380)
31. Kishida, O., and K. Nishimura. 2005. Multiple inducible defences against multiple predators in the anuran tadpole, Rana pirica. Evolutionary Ecology Research 7: 619-631. (Pubitemid 40817481)
32. Kolar, C. S., and D. H. Wahl. 1998. Daphnid morphology deters fish predators. Oecologia 116: 556-564.
33. Kopp, K., M. Wachlevski, and P. C. Eterovick. 2006. Environmental complexity reduces tadpole predation by water bugs. Canadian Journal of Zoology 84: 136-140.
34. Labeyrie, E., W. U. Blanckenhorn, and M. Rahier. 2003. Mate choice and toxicity in two species of leaf beetles with different types of chemical defence. Journal of Chemical Ecology 29: 1665-1680. (Pubitemid 36875562)
35. Lardner, B. 2000. Morphological and life history responses to predators in larvae of seven anurans. Oikos 88: 169-180. (Pubitemid 30121299)
36. Leather, S. R. 1988. Size, reproductive potential and fecundity in insects: things aren't as simple as they seem. Oikos 51: 386-389.
37. McPeek, M. A. 2004. The growth/predation risk trade-off: So what is the mechanism? American Naturalist 163:E88-E111.
38. Nicieza, A. G. 2000. Interacting effects of predation risk and food availability on larval anuran behaviour and development. Oecologia 123: 497-505.
39. Pasteels, J. M., C. Theuring, L. Witte, and T. Hartmann. 2003. Sequestration and metabolism of protoxic pyrrolidine alkaloids by larvae of the leaf beetle Platyphora boucardi and their transfer via pupae into defensive secretions of adults. Journal of Chemical Ecology 29: 337-355.
40. Peacor, S. D. 2002. Positive effects of predators on prey growth rate through induced modifications of prey behavior. Ecology 5: 77-85.
41. Peters, R. H. 1983. Ecological implications of body size. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
42. Relyea, R. A. 2003. Predators come and predators go: the reversibility of predator-induced traits. Ecology 84: 1840-1848.
43. Relyea, R. A. 2007. Getting out alive: how predators affect the decision to metamorphose. Oecologia 152: 389-400.
44. Rowe, L., and D. Ludwig. 1991. Size and timing of metamorphosis in complex life-cycles: time constraints and variation. Ecology 72: 413-427.
45. Scrimgeour, G. J., and J. M. Culp. 1994. Feeding while evading predators by a lotic mayfly: linking short-term foraging behaviors to long-term fitness consequences. Oecologia 100: 128-134.
46. Semlitsch, R. D., D. E. Scott, and J. H. K. Pechmann. 1988. Time and size at metamorphosis related to adult fitness in Ambystoma talpoideum. Ecology 69: 184-192.
47. Semlitsch, R. D., and J. Whitfield Gibbons. 1988. Fish predation in size-structured populations of treefrog tadpoles. Oecologia 75: 321-326.
48. Sih, A., G. Englund, and D. Wooster. 1998. Emergent impacts of multiple predators on prey. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 13: 350-355. (Pubitemid 28385521)
49. Skelly, D. K. 1994. Activity level and the susceptibility of anuran larvae to predation. Animal Behavior 47: 465-468.
50. Skelly, D. K., and E. E. Werner. 1990. Behavioral and lifehistorical responses of larval American toads to an odonate predator. Ecology 71: 2313-2322.
51. Smith, D. C., 1987. Adult recruitment in chorus frogs: effects of size and date at metamorphosis. Ecology 68: 344-350.
52. Sokolovska, N., L. Rowe, and F. Johansson. 2000. Fitness and body size in mature odonates. Ecological Entomology 25: 239-248. (Pubitemid 30301894)
53. Stabell, O. B., F. Ogbebo, and R. Primicerio. 2003. Inducible defences in Daphnia depend on latent alarm signals from conspecific prey activated in predators. Chemical Senses 28: 141-153.
54. Stav, G., L. Blaustein, and B. P. Kotler. 2007. Direct and indirect effects of dragonfly (Anax Imperator) nymphs on green toad (Bufo viridis) tadpoles. Hydrobiologia 579: 85-93.
55. Steiner, U. K. 2007a. Investment in defense and cost of predator-induced defense along a resource gradient. Oecologia 152: 201-210.
56. Steiner, U. K. 2007b. Linking antipredator behavior, ingestion, gut evacuation and costs of predator-induced responses in tadpoles. Animal Behavior 74: 1473-1479.
57. Steiner, U. K., and T. Pfeiffer. 2007. Optimizing time and resource allocation trade-offs for investment into morphological and behavioral defense. American Naturalist 169: 118-129.
58. Stoks, R., M. De Block, and M. A. McPeek. 2005. Alternative growth and energy storage responses to mortality threats in damselflies. Ecology Letters 8: 1307-1316.
59. Tarr, T. L., and K. J. Babbitt. 2002. Effects of habitat complexity and predator identity on predation of Rana clamitans larvae. Amphibia-Reptilia 23: 13-20.
60. Taylor, B. W., C. R. Anderston, and B. Peckarsky. 1998. Effects of size at metamorphosis on stonefly fecundity, longevity, and reproductive success. Oecologia 114: 494-502. (Pubitemid 28259827)
61. Teplitsky, C., S. Plenet, and P. Joly. 2005a. Costs and limits of dosage response to predation risk: To what extent can tadpoles invest in anti-predator morphology? Oecologia 145: 364-370.
62. Teplitsky, C., S. Plenet, J.-P. Léna, E. Mermet, and P. Joly. 2005b. Escape behavior and ultimate causes of specific induced defences in an anuran tadpole. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 18: 180-190.
63. Van Buskirk, J., and M. Arioli. 2002. Dosage response of an induced defense: How sensitive are tadpoles to predation risk? Ecology 83: 1580-1585.
64. Van Buskirk, J., and B. R. Schmidt. 2000. Predator-induced phenotypic plasticity in larval newts: trade-offs, selection, and variation in nature. Ecology 81: 3009-3028.
65. Werner, E. E. 1986. Amphibian metamorphosis: growth rate, predation risk, and the optimal size at transformation. American Naturalist 128: 319-341.
66. Werner, E. E., and J. F. Gilliam. 1984. The ontogenetic niche shift and species interactions in size structured populations. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 15: 393-425.
67. Yurewicz, K. L. 2004. A growth/mortality trade-off in larval salamanders and the coexistence of intraguild predators and prey. Oecologia 138: 102-111.