Does prey mobility affect niche width and individual specialization in hunting wasps? A network-based analysis

Oikos

Volumn 122, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 385-394

  Polidori, Carlo ^a,b   Santoro, Davide ^c   Blüthgen, Nico ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MILAN   (Italy)

^b MUSEO NACIONAL DE CIENCIAS NATURALES   (Spain)

^c VICTORIA UNIVERSITY OF WELLINGTON   (New Zealand)

^d DARMSTADT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DIET; HUNTING; NICHE; NUMERICAL MODEL; POPULATION VIABILITY ANALYSIS; PREDATOR; PREY AVAILABILITY; SPECIALIZATION; WASP;

APOIDEA; ARANEAE; COLEOPTERA;

EID: 84874314975     PISSN: 00301299     EISSN: 16000706     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2012.20387.x     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. Ackermann M. and Doebeli M. 2004. Evolution of niche width and adaptive diversification. Evolution 58: 2599-2612.
2. Aizen M. A. et al. 2008. Invasive mutualists erode native pollination webs. PLoS Biol. 6: e31. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio. 0060031.
3. Anholt B. R. and Werner E. E. 1995. Interaction between food availability and predation mortality mediated by adaptive behavior. Ecology 76: 2230-2234.
4. Araújo M. S. et al. 2008. Network analysis reveals contrasting effects of intraspecific competition on individual versus population diets. Ecology 89: 1981-1993.
5. Araújo M. S. et al. 2009. Individual-level diet variation in four species of Brazilian frogs. J. Anim. Ecol. 78: 848-856.
6. Araújo M. S. et al. 2010. Nested diets: a novel pattern of individual-level resource use. Oikos 119: 81-88.
7. Banks P. B. et al. 2000. Nonlinearity in the predation risk of prey mobility. Proc. R. Soc. B 267: 1621-1625.
8. Bartos M. 2002. Distance of approach to prey is adjusted to the prey's ability to escape in Yllenus arenarius (Araneae, Salticidae). - In: Toft S. and Scharff N. (eds), European Arachnology 2000: Proc. 19th Eur. Colloq. Arachnol. Aarhus Univ. Press, pp. 33-38.
9. Bascompte J. et al. 2003. The nested assembly of plant-animal mutualistic networks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100: 9383-9387.
10. Begon M. et al. 1990. Ecology: individuals, populations and communities. - Blackwell.
11. Blüthgen N. 2012. Why network analysis is often disconnected from community ecology: a critique and an ecologist's guide. Basic Appl. Ecol. 11: 185-195.
12. Blüthgen N. et al. 2004. Bottom-up control and co-occurrence in complex communities: honeydew and nectar determine rainforest ant mosaic. Oikos 106: 344-358.
13. Blüthgen N. et al. 2006a. Food plant selection by stick insects (Phasmida) in Bornean rain forest. J. Trop. Ecol. 22: 35-40.
14. Blüthgen N. et al. 2006b. Ant hemipteran trophobioses in Bornean rainforest - diversity, specificity and monopolisation. Ins. Soc. 53: 194-203.
15. Blüthgen N. et al. 2006c. Measuring specialization in species interaction networks. BMC Ecol. 6: 9.
16. Blüthgen N. et al. 2007. Specialization, constraints, and conflicting interests in mutualistic networks. Curr. Biol. 17: 341-346.
17. Blüthgen N. et al. 2008. What do interaction network metrics tell us about specialization and biological traits? Ecology 89: 3387-3399.
18. Bolnick D. I. 2001. Intraspecific competition favours niche width expansion in Drosophila melanogaster. Nature 410: 463-466.
19. Bolnick D. I. and Paull J. E. 2009. Diet similarity declines with morphological distance between conspecific individuals. Evol. Ecol. Res. 11: 1217-1233.
20. Bolnick D. I. et al. 2002. Measuring individual-level resource specialization. Ecology 83: 2936-2941.
21. Bolnick D. I. et al. 2003. The ecology of individuals: incidence and implications of individual specialization. Am. Nat. 161: 1-28.
22. Bolnick D. I. et al. 2007. Comparative support for the niche variation hypothesis that more generalized populations also are more heterogeneous. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104: 10075-10079.
23. Bolnick D. I. et al. 2010. Ecological release from interspecific competition leads to decoupled changes in population and individual niche widths. Proc. R. Soc. B 277: 1789-1797.
24. Brodsky A. K. 1996. The evolution of insect flight. - Oxford Univ. Press.
25. Clements D. R. and Harmsen R. 1990. Predatory behavior and prey-stage preference of stigmaeid and phytoseid mites and their potential compatibility in biological control. Can. Entomol. 122: 321-328.
26. Danks H. V. 1970. Biology of some stem-nesting aculeate Hymenoptera. Trans. R. Entomol. Soc. Lond. 122: 323-399.
27. Darimont C. T. et al. 2009. Landscape heterogeneity and marine subsidy generate extensive niche variation in a terrestrial carnivore. J. Anim. Ecol. 79: 126-133.
28. de Roos A. M. et al. 1991. Mobility versus density limited predator-prey dynamics on different spatial scales. Proc. R. Soc. B 246: 117-122.
29. Dormann C. F. et al. 2009. Indices, graphs and null models: analysing bipartite ecological networks. Open Ecol. J. 2: 7-24.
30. Durell S. E. A. Le V. Dit. 2000. Individual feeding specialisation in shorebirds: population consequences and conservation implications. Biol. Rev. 75: 503-518.
31. Edmunds J. 1990. Wasp predation on orb web spiders (Araneidae) in Ghana. Acta Zool. Fenn. 190: 117-122.
32. Fonseca C. R. and Ganade G. 1996. Asymmetries, compartments and null interactions in an Amazonian ant-plant community. J. Anim. Ecol. 65: 339-347.
33. Geitzenauer H. and Bernays E. A. 1996. Plant effects on prey choice by a vespid wasp. Ecol. Entomol. 21: 227-234.
34. Jackson A. L. et al. 2004. Consumer resource matching in a food chain when both predators and prey are free to move. Oikos 106: 445-450.
35. Jaenike J. 1990. Host specialization in phytophagous insects. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 21: 243-273.
36. Junker R. R. et al. 2012. Responses to olfactory signals reflect network structure of flower visitor interactions. J. Anim. Ecol. 79: 818-823.
37. Hassell M. P. 1978. The dynamics of arthropod predator-prey systems. - Princeton Univ. Press.
38. Heinrich B. 1979. Bumblebee economics. - Harvard Univ. Press.
39. Husen G. and Fiksen Ø. 2010. Modelling encounter rates and distribution of mobile predators and prey. Progr. Oceanog. 84: 93-104.
40. Ings T. C. et al. 2009. Ecological networks - beyond food webs. J. Anim. Ecol. 78: 253-269.
41. Levins R. 1968. Evolution in changing environments: some theoretical explorations. - Princeton University Press.
42. Linsley E. G. and MacSwain J. W. 1956. Some observations on the nesting habits and prey of Cerceris californica Cresson (Hymenoptera, Sphecidae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 49: 71-84.
43. Maerz J. C. et al. 2006. Trophic polymorphism in a terrestrial salamander. Evol. Ecol. Res. 8: 23-35.
44. Manly B. 1997. Randomization bootstrap and Monte Carlo methods in biology. - Chapman and Hall.
45. Martins E. G. et al. 2008. Sex and season affect individual- level diet variation in the Neotropical marsupial Gracilinanus microtarsus (Didelphidae). Biotropica 40: 132-135.
46. Medler J. T. 1965. Biology of Isodontia (Murrayella) mexicana in trap-nests in Wisconsin (Hymenoptera: Sphecidae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 58: 137-142.
47. O'Neill K. M. 2001. Solitary wasps: behaviour and natural history. - Cornell Univ. Press.
48. Pearson D. L. 1988. Biology of tiger beetles. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 33: 123-147.
49. Polidori C. et al. 2005. Provisioning patterns and choice of prey in the digger wasp Cerceris arenaria (Hymenoptera: Crabronidae): the role of prey size. Eur. J. Entomol. 102: 801-804.
50. Polidori C. et al. 2007. Temporal relationship between the prey spectrum and population structure of the weevil-hunting wasp Cerceris arenaria (Hymenoptera, Crabronidae). Zool. Stud. 46: 83-91.
51. Polidori C. et al. 2010. Taxon-biased diet preference in the 'generalist' beetle-hunting wasp Cerceris rubida provides insights on the evolution of prey specialization in apoid wasps. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 99: 544-558.
52. Polidori C. et al. 2011. Individual prey specialization in wasps: predator size is a weak predictor of taxonomic niche width and niche overlap. - In: Polidori C. (ed.), Predation in the Hymenoptera: an evolutionary perspective. Transworld Res. Network, pp. 101-122.
53. Polidori C. et al. 2012. Morphological distance and inter-nest distance account for intra-specific prey overlap in digger wasps (Hymenoptera: Crabronidae). Popul. Ecol. 54: 443-454.
54. Polis G. A. 1984. Age structure component of niche width and intraspecific resource partitioning: can age groups function as ecological species? Am. Nat. 123: 541-564.
55. Pulliam H. R. 1974. On the theory of optimal diets. Am. Nat. 108: 59-74.
56. Punzo F. 2005. Experience affects hunting behavior of the wasp, Pepsis mildei Stål (Hymenoptera: Pompilidae). J. N. Y. Entomol. Soc. 113: 222-229.
57. Provost C. et al. 2006. Prey Selection by the Lady Beetle Harmonia axyridis: the influence of prey mobility and prey species. J. Insect Behav. 19: 265-277.
58. Rendell L. and Whitehead H. 2001. Culture in whales and dolphins. Behav. Brain Sci. 24: 309-382.
59. Rohlfs M. and Hoffmeister T. S. 2004. Spatial aggregation across ephemeral resource patches in insect communities: an adaptive response to natural enemies? Oecologia 140: 654-61.
60. Santoro D. et al. 2011. Complex interactions between components of individual prey specialization affect mechanisms of niche variation in a grasshopper-hunting wasp. J. Anim. Ecol. 80: 1123-1133.
61. Sih A. 1984. The behavioural response race between predator and prey. Am. Nat. 123: 143-150.
62. Stuart B. et al. 2006. Stable isotopes indicate sex-specific and long-term individual foraging specialisation in diving sea birds. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 311: 157-164.
63. Stubblefield J. W. et al. 1993. Temporal, spatial, sex-ratio and body-size heterogeneity of prey species taken by the beewolf Philanthus sanbornii (Hymenoptera: Sphecidae). Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 339: 397-423.
64. Svanbäck R. and Eklöv P. 2003. Morphology dependent foraging efficiency in perch: a tradeoff for ecological specialization? Oikos 102: 273-284.
65. Svanbäck R. and Persson L. 2004. Individual diet specialization, niche width and population dynamics: implications for trophic polymorphism. J. Anim. Ecol. 73: 973-982.
66. Svanbäck R. and Bolnick D. I. 2005. Intraspecific competition affects the strength of individual specialization: an optimal diet theory method. Evol. Ecol. Res. 7: 993-1012.
67. Svanbck R. and Bolnick D. I. 2007. Intraspecific competition drives increased resource use diversity within a natural population. Proc. R. Soc. B 274: 839-844.
68. Tormos J. et al. 2000. Nesting behavior of Oxybelus lamellatus Olivier (Hymenoptera: Sphecidae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 93: 326-332.
69. Travis J. M. J. and Palmer S. C. F. 2005. Spatial processes can determine the relationship between prey encounter rate and prey density. Biol. Lett. 1: 136-138.
70. Tsunkei K. 1965. The nesting biology of Stizus pulcherrimus F. Smith (Hym., Sphecidae) with special reference to the geographic variation. Etizenia 10: 1-21.
71. Utne-Palm A. C. 1999. The effect of prey mobility, prey contrast, turbidity and spectral composition on the reaction distance of Gobiusculus flavescens to its planktonic prey. J. Fish Biol. 54: 1244-1258.
72. Vàzquez D. P. et al. 2005. Species abundance patterns and the distribution of specialization in host-parasite interaction networks. J. Anim. Ecol. 74: 946-955.
73. Weiss M. R. et al. 2004. Predatory wasps learn to overcome the shelter defenses of their larval prey. Anim. Behav. 68: 45-54.
74. Werner E. E. et al. 1981. The role of foraging profitability and experience in habitat use by the bluegill sunfish. Ecology 62: 116-125.
75. Wilson R. P. 2010. Resource partitioning and niche hyper-volume overlap in free-living Pygoscelid penguins. Funct. Ecol. 24: 646-657.
76. Yeates D. K. and Wiegmann B. M. (eds) 2005. The evolutionary biology of flies. - Columbia Univ. Press.