Intermediate fragmentation per se provides stable predator-prey metapopulation dynamics

Ecology Letters

Volumn 15, Issue 8, 2012, Pages 856-863

  Cooper, Jennifer K ^a   Li, Jiqiu ^b   Montagnes, David J S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

^b SOUTH CHINA NORMAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Ciliate; Corridor; Didinium; Heterogeneity; Microcosm; Migration; Paramecium; Stability

Indexed keywords

ABUNDANCE; AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT; CILIATE; CONNECTIVITY; EXTINCTION; HABITAT FRAGMENTATION; HETEROGENEITY; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; METAPOPULATION; MICROCOSM; PERSISTENCE; POPULATION DYNAMICS; PREDATOR-PREY INTERACTION; PROTOZOAN; SURVIVAL;

ARTICLE; CILIATE; FOOD CHAIN; PARAMECIUM; POPULATION DYNAMICS; SURVIVAL; THEORETICAL MODEL;

CILIOPHORA; FOOD CHAIN; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PARAMECIUM; POPULATION DYNAMICS; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS;

CILIOPHORA; DIDINIUM; PARAMECIUM;

EID: 84863489731     PISSN: 1461023X     EISSN: 14610248     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2012.01808.x     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Amezcua, A.B. & Holyoak, M. (2000). Empirical evidence for predator-prey source-sink dynamics. Ecology, 81, 3087-3098.
2. Andrews, A. (1990). Fragmentation of habitat by roads and utility corridors: a review. Australian Zoologist, 26, 130-141.
3. Bjørnstad, O.N., Ims, R.A. & Lambin, X. (1999). Spatial population dynamics: analyzing patterns and processes of population synchrony. Trends Ecol. Evol., 11, 427-432.
4. Bonsall, M.B. & Hassell, M.P. (2005). Understanding ecological concepts: the role of laboratory systems. Adv. Ecol. Res., 37, 1-36.
5. Boone, R.B. & Hobbs, N.T. (2004). Lines around fragments: effects of fencing on large herbivores. African J. Range Forage Sci., 21, 147-158.
6. Briggs, C.J. & Hoopes, M.F. (2004). Stabilizing effects in spatial parasitoid-host and predator-prey models models: a review. Theoretic. Pop. Biol., 65, 299-315.
7. Bull, J.C., Pickup, N.J., Hassell, M.P. & Bonsall, M.B. (2006). Habitat shape, metapopulation processes and the dynamics of multispecies predator-prey interactions. J. Animal Ecol., 75, 899-907.
8. Burkey, T.V. (1997). Metapopulation extinction in fragmented landscapes: using bacteria and protozoa communities as model ecosystems. Am. Nat., 150, 568-591.
9. Crowley, P.H. (1981). Dispersal and the stability of predator-prey interactions. Am. Nat., 118, 673-701.
10. Di Giulio, M., Holderegger, R. & Tobias, S. (2009). Effects of habitat and landscape fragmentation on humans and biodiversity in densely populated landscapes. J. Environ. Manage., 90, 2959-2968.
11. Didham, R.K., Kapos, V. & Ewers, R.M. (2011). Rethinking the conceptual foundations of habitat fragmentation research. Oikos, 121, 161-170.
12. Donald, P.F. & Evans, A.D. (2006). Habitat connectivity and matrix restoration: the wider implications of agri-environment schemes. J. App. Ecol., 43, 209-218.
13. Dunne, B.M. & Quinn, M.S. (2009). Effectiveness of above-ground pipeline mitigation for moose (Alces alces) and other large mammals. Biol. Conserv., 142, 332-343.
14. Fahrig, L. (2003). Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst., 34, 487-515.
15. Gause, G.F. (1934). The Struggle for Existence. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, MD.
16. Gilbert-Norton, L., Wilson, R., Stevens, J.R. & Beard, K.H. (2010). A meta-analytic review of corridor effectiveness. Conserv. Biol., 24, 660-668.
17. Gonzalez, A., Lawton, J.H., Gilbert, F.S., Blackburb, T.M. & Evans-Freke, I. (1998). Metapopulation dynamics, abundance, and distribution in a microecosystem. Science, 281, 2045-2047.
18. Hanski, I. (1999). Habitat connectivity, habitat continuity, and metapopulations in dynamic landscapes. Oikos, 87, 209-219.
19. Hauzy, C., Gauduchon, M., Hulot, F.D. & Loreau, M. (2010). Density-dependent dispersal and relative dispersal affect the stability of predator-prey metacommunities. J. Theor. Biol., 266, 458-469.
20. Hobbs, N.T., Galvin, K.A., Stokes, C.J., Lackett, J.M., Ash, A.J., Boone, R.B. et al. (2008). Fragmentation of rangelands: implications for humans, animals, and landscapes. Global Enivron. Change, 18, 776-785.
21. Holderegger, R. & Di Giulio, M. (2010). The genetic effects of roads: a review of empirical evidence. Basic Appl. Ecol., 11, 522-531.
22. Holland, M. & Hastings, A. (2008). Strong effect of dispersal network structure on ecological dynamics. Nature, 456, 792-795.
23. Holyoak, M. (2000). Habitat patch arrangement and metapopulation persistence of predators and prey. Am. Nat., 156, 378-389.
24. Holyoak, M. & Lawler, S.P. (1996a). Persistence of an extinction-prone predator-prey interaction through metapopulation dynamics. Ecology, 77, 1867-1879.
25. Holyoak, M. & Lawler, S.P. (1996b). The role of dispersal in predator-prey metapopulation dynamics. J. Anim. Ecol., 65, 640-652.
26. Holyoak, M. & Lawler, S.P. (2005). The contribution of laboratory experiments on protists to understanding population and metapopulation dynamics. Adv. Ecol. Res., 37, 245-271.
27. Jaeger, J.A.G. & Fahrig, L. (2004). Effects of road fencing on population persistence. Conserv. Biol., 18, 1651-1657.
28. Jessup, C.M., Kassen, R., Forde, S.E., Kerr, B., Buckling, A., Rainey, P.B. et al. (2005). Big questions, small worlds: microbial model systems in ecology. Trends Ecol. Evol., 19, 189-197.
29. Karsai, I. & Kampis, G. (2011). Connected fragmented habitats facilitate stable coexistence dynamics. Ecol. Model., 222, 447-455.
30. Keller, I. & Largiadèr, C.R. (2003). Recent habitat fragmentation caused by major roads leads to reduction of gene flow and loss of genetic variability in ground beetles. Proc. Royal Soc. B, 270, 417-423.
31. Liebhold, A., Koenig, W.D. & Bjørnstad, O.N. (2004). Spatial synchrony in population dynamics. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst., 35, 467-490.
32. Luckenbill, L.S. (1973). Coexistence in laboratory populations of Paramecium aurelia and its predator Didinium nastum. Ecology, 54, 1320-1327.
33. Luckinbill, L.S. (1974). The effects of space and enrichment on a predator-prey system. Ecology, 55, 1142-1147.
34. Malay, E.J. (1978). Stability of the interaction between Didinium and Paramecium: effects of dispersal and predator time lag. Ecology, 59, 733-741.
35. McGarigal, K. & Cushman, S.A. (2002). Comparative evaluation of experimental approaches to the study of habitat fragmentation effect. Ecol. Appl., 12, 335-345.
36. Ryall, K.L. & Fahrig, L. (2006). Response of predators to loss and fragmentation of prey habitat: a review of theory. Ecology, 87, 1086-1093.
37. Sambatti, J.B.W., Stahl, E. & Harrison, S. (2008). Metapopulation structure and the conservation consequences of population fragmentation. In: Conservation Biology: Evolution in Action (eds Carroll, S.P. & Fox, C.W.). Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 50-67.
38. de Santos, R.S. & Smith, D.G. (1993). Environmental auditing: an introduction to issues of habitat fragmentation relative to transportation corridors with special reference to high-speed rail (HSR). Environ. Manage., 17, 111-114.
39. Taylor, A.D. (1990). Metapopulations, dispersal, and predator-prey dynamics: an overview. Ecology, 71, 429-433.
40. Wehling, S. & Diekmann, M. (2009). Importance of hedgerows as habitat corridors for forest plants in agricultural landscapes. Biol. Cons., 142, 2522-2530.
41. Williams, N.S.G., Schwartz, M.W., Vesk, P.A., McCarthy, M.A., Hahs, A.K., Clemants, S.E. et al. (2009). A conceptual framework for predicting the effects of urban environments on floras. J. Ecol., 97, 4-9.