Scale and the guild functional response: Density-dependent predation varies with plot size

Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology

Volumn 413, Issue , 2012, Pages 50-55

  Long, William Christopher ^a   Hines, Anson H ^a  

^a SMITHSONIAN ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Density dependent effects; Functional response; Mercenaria mercenaria; Predation; Spatial scale

Indexed keywords

ABUNDANCE; BIVALVE; DENSITY DEPENDENCE; FOOD WEB; FUNCTIONAL RESPONSE; PATCH SIZE; PREDATION; PREDATOR-PREY INTERACTION; SPATIOTEMPORAL ANALYSIS;

CHESAPEAKE BAY; FLORIDA [UNITED STATES]; INDIAN RIVER; UNITED STATES;

BIVALVIA; MERCENARIA; MERCENARIA MERCENARIA;

EID: 83755164208     PISSN: 00220981     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jembe.2011.11.015     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Bergström U., Englund G. Plugging space into predator-prey models: an empirical approach. Am. Nat. 2006, 167:246-259.
2. Burnham K.P., Anderson D.R. Model Selection and Multimodel Inference: A Practical Information-theoretic Approach 2002, Springer Science. 2nd ed.
3. Chase J.M., Wilson W.G., Richards S.A. Foraging trade-offs and resource patchiness: theory and experiments with a freshwater snail community. Ecol. Lett. 2001, 4:304-312.
4. Clark M.E., Wolcott T.G., Wolcott D.L., Hines A.H. Intraspecific interference among foraging blue crabs Callinectes sapidus: interactive effects of predator density and prey patch distribution. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1999, 178:69-78.
5. Colton T.F. Extending functional response data to include a second prey type: an experimental test. Ecology 1987, 68:900-912.
6. Cummings V., Hewitt J., Halliday J., Mackay G. Optimizing the success of Austrovenus stutchburyi restoration: preliminary investigations in a New Zealand estuary. J. Shellfish. Res. 2007, 26:89-100.
7. Eggleston D.B., Lipcius R.N., Hines A.H. Density-dependent predation by blue crabs upon infaunal clam species with contrasting distribution and abundance patterns. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1992, 85:55-68.
8. Eggleston D.B., Etherington L.L., Elis W.E. Organism response to habitat patchiness: species and habitat-dependent recruitment of decapod crustaceans. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1998, 223:111-132.
9. Forrester G.E., Steele M.A. Predators, prey refuges, and the spatial scaling of density-dependent prey mortality. Ecology 2004, 85:1332-1342.
10. Hassell M.P., Lawton J.H., Beddington J.R. Sigmoid functional responses by invertebrate predators and parasitoids. J. Anim. Ecol. 1977, 46:249-262.
11. Hewitt J.E., Thrush S.F., Bonsdorff E. The effect of spatial and temporal heterogeneity on the design and analysis of empirical studies of scale-dependent systems. Am. Nat. 2007, 169:398-408.
12. Hines A.H., Whitlatch R.B., Thrush S.F., Hewitt J., Cummings V., Dayton P.K., Legendre P. Nonlinear foraging response of a large marine predator to benthic prey: eagle ray pits and infaunal bivalves in a New Zealand sandflat. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1997, 216:191-210.
13. Hines A.H., Long W.C., Terwin J.R., Thrush S.F. Facilitation, interference, and scale: the spatial distribution of prey patches affects predation rates in an estuarine benthic community. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2009, 385:127-135.
14. Holling C.S. Some characteristics of simple types of predation and parasitism. Can. Entomol. 1959, 91:385-398.
15. Holt R.D., Lawton J.H. The ecological consequences of shared natural enemies. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 1994, 25:495-520.
16. Hovel K.A., Lipcius R.N. Habitat fragmentation in a seagrass landscape: patch size and complexity control blue crab survival. Ecology 2001, 82:1814-1829.
17. Irlandi E.A., Ambrose W.G., Orlando B.A. Landscape ecology and the marine environment: how spatial configuration of seagrass habitat influences growth and survival of the bay scallop. Oikos 1995, 72:307-313.
18. Johnson D.W. Density dependence in marine fish populations revealed at small and large spatial scales. Ecology 2006, 87:319-325.
19. Kuhlmann M.L., Hines A.H. Density-dependent predation by blue crabs, Callinectes sapidus, on natural prey populations of infaunal bivalves. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2005, 295:215-228.
20. Long W.C., Burke R.P. Habitat size, flora, and fauna: interactions in a tidal saltwater marsh. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 2007, 353:80-88.
21. Long W.C., Seitz R.D. Trophic interactions under stress: hypoxia enhances foraging in an estuarine food web. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2008, 362:59-68.
22. Mansour R.A., Lipcius R.N. Density-dependent foraging and mutual interference in blue crabs preying upon infaunal clams. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1991, 72:239-246.
23. Micheli F. Effects of predator foraging behavior on patterns of prey mortality in marine soft bottoms. Ecol. Monogr. 1997, 67:203-224.
24. Pitt W.C., Ritchie M.E. Influence of prey distribution on the functional response of lizards. Oikos 2002, 96:157-163.
25. Santos C.D., Saraiva S., Palmeirim J.M., Granadeiro J.P. How do waders perceive buried prey with patchy distribution? The role of prey density and size of patch. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 2009, 372:43-48.
26. Seitz R.D., Lipcius R.N., Hines A.H., Eggleston D.B. Density-dependent predation, habitat variation, and the persistence of marine bivalve prey. Ecology 2001, 82:2435-2451.
27. Steele M.A., Forrester G.E. Small-scale field experiments accurately scale up to predict density dependence in reef fish populations at large scales. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2005, 102:13513-13516.
28. Thrush S.F., Cummings V.J., Dayton P.K., Ford R., Grant J., Hewitt J., Hines A.H., Lawrie S.M., Pridmore R., Legendre P., Mc Ardle B., Schneider D.C., Turner S.J., Whitlatch R.B., Wilkinson M.R. Matching the outcome of small-scale density manipulation experiments with larger scale patterns: an example of bivalve adult/juvenile interactions. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1997, 216:153-169.
29. Tschanz B., Bersier L., Bacher S. Function response: a question of alternative prey and predator density. Ecology 2007, 88:1300-1308.
30. Vahl W.K., van der Meer J., Meijer K., Piersma T., Veissing F.J. Interference competition, the spatial distribution of food and free-living foragers. Anim. Behav. 2007, 74:1493-1503.
31. Weissburg M.J., Zimmer-Faust R.K. Life and death in moving fluids: hydrodynamic effects on chemosensory-mediated predation. Ecology 1993, 74:1428-1443.
32. Wellenreuther M., Connell S.D. Response of predators to prey abundance: separating the effects of prey density and patch size. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 2002, 273:61-71.
33. Whitlatch R.B., Hines A.H., Thrush S.F., Hewitt J.E., Cummings V. Benthic faunal responses to variations in patch density and patch size of a suspension-feeding bivalve. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1997, 216:171-189.
34. Wilson W.G., Osenberg C.W., Schmitt R.J., Nisbet R.M. Complementary foraging behaviors allow coexistence of two consumers. Ecology 1999, 80:2358-2372.
35. Zimmer-Faust R.K., Commins J.E., Browne K.A. Regulatory effects of environmental chemical signals on search behavior and foraging success. Ecology 1999, 80:1432-1446.