Limiting similarity, species packing, and the shape of competition kernels

Journal of Theoretical Biology

Volumn 339, Issue , 2013, Pages 3-13

  Leimar, Olof ^a   Sasaki, Akira ^b,c   Doebeli, Michael ^d   Dieckmann, Ulf ^c  

^a STOCKHOLM UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b GRADUATE UNIVERSITY FOR ADVANCED STUDIES   (Japan)

^c INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR APPLIED SYSTEMS ANALYSIS   (Austria)

^d UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Apparent competition; Community ecology; Fourier analysis; Pattern formation; Resource competition

Indexed keywords

CLUSTER ANALYSIS; COMMUNITY ECOLOGY; COMMUNITY STRUCTURE; ECOLOGICAL THEORY; FOURIER TRANSFORM; INTERSPECIFIC COMPETITION; NICHE; PATTERN RECOGNITION; RESOURCE AVAILABILITY; THEORETICAL STUDY;

ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL TRAIT; COMMUNITY ECOLOGY; COMMUNITY STRUCTURE; COMPETITION KERNEL; COMPETITIVE ABILITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; INTERSPECIFIC COMPETITION; LIMITING SIMILARITY; ORGANISMAL INTERACTION; PHENOTYPE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPECIES PACKING;

APPARENT COMPETITION; COMMUNITY ECOLOGY; FOURIER ANALYSIS; PATTERN FORMATION; RESOURCE COMPETITION;

ANIMALS; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; COMPETITIVE BEHAVIOR; ECOSYSTEM; FOURIER ANALYSIS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; POPULATION DYNAMICS; SPECIES SPECIFICITY;

EID: 84887165819     PISSN: 00225193     EISSN: 10958541     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2013.08.005     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Abrams P. Limiting similarity and the form of the competition coefficient. Theoretical Population Biology 1975, 8:356-375.
2. Abrams P. The theory of limiting similarity. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 1983, 14:359-376.
3. Abrams P.A. High competition with low similarity and low competition with high similarity. exploitative and apparent competition in consumer-resource systems. American Naturalist 1998, 152:114-128.
4. Abrams P.A., Matsuda H. Positive indirect effects between prey species that share predators. Ecology 1996, 77:610-616.
5. Abrams P.A., Rueffler C. Coexistence and limiting similarity of consumer species competing for a linear array of resources. Ecology 2009, 90:812-822.
6. Abrams P.A., Rueffler C., Dinnage R. Competition-similarity relationships and the nonlinearity of competitive effects in consumer-resource systems. American Naturalist 2008, 172:463-474.
7. Ackermann M., Doebeli M. Evolution of niche width and adaptive diversification. Evolution 2004, 58:2599-2612.
8. Allen C.R., Garmestani A.S., Havlicek T.D., Marquet P.A., Peterson G.D., Restrepo C., Stow C.A., Weeks B.E. Patterns in body mass distributions. sifting among alternative hypotheses. Ecology Letters 2006, 9:630-643.
9. Barabás G., Meszéna G. When the exception becomes the rule. the disappearance of limiting similarity in the Lotka-Volterra model. Journal of Theoretical Biology 2009, 258:89-94.
10. Barabás G., Meszéna G., Ostling A. Community robustness and limiting similarity in periodic environments. Theoretical Ecology 2012, 5:265-282.
11. Barabás G., Pigolotti S., Gyllenberg M., Dieckmann U., Meszéna G. Continuous coexistence or discrete species? A new review of an old question. Evolutionary Ecology Research 2012, 14:523-554.
12. Benedetto J.J., Zimmermann G. Sampling multipliers and the Poisson summation formula. Journal of Fourier Analysis and Applications 1997, 3:505-523.
13. Case T.J. Niche separation and resource scaling. American Naturalist 1981, 118:554-560.
14. Dayan T., Simberloff D. Ecological and community-wide character displacement. the next generation. Ecology Letters 2005, 8:875-894.
15. Dieckmann U., Brännström Å., HilleRisLambers R., Ito H.C. The adaptive dynamics of community structure. Mathematics for Ecology and Environmental Sciences 2007, 145-177. Springer Verlag. Y. Takeuchi, K. Sato, Y. Iwasa (Eds.).
16. Doebeli M., Blok H.J., Leimar O., Dieckmann U. Multimodal pattern formation in phenotype distributions of sexual populations. Proceedings of the Royal Society B. Biological Sciences 2007, 274:347-357.
17. Elmer K.R., Lehtonen T.K., Kautt A.F., Harrod C., Meyer A. Rapid sympatric ecological differentiation of crater lake cichlid fishes within historic times. BMC Biology 2010, 8:60.
18. Fort H., Scheffer M., van Nes E. The clumping transition in niche competition. a robust critical phenomenon. Journal of Statistical Mechanics. Theory and Experiment 2010, P05005.
19. Fort H., Scheffer M., van Nes E.H. The paradox of the clumps mathematically explained. Theoretical Ecology 2009, 2:171-176.
20. Gyllenberg M., Meszéna G. On the impossibility of coexistence of infinitely many strategies. Journal of Mathematical Biology 2005, 50:133-160.
21. Hernández-García E., López C., Pigolotti S., Andersen K.H. Species competition. coexistence, exclusion and clustering. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A. Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences 2009, 367:3183-3195.
22. Holt R.D. Predation, apparent competition, and the structure of prey communities. Theoretical Population Biology 1977, 12:197-229.
23. Ispolatov J., Doebeli M. Diversification along environmental gradients in spatially structured populations. Evolutionary Ecology Research 2009, 11:295-304.
24. Law R., Marrow P., Dieckmann U. On evolution under asymmetric competition. Evolutionary Ecology 1997, 11:485-501.
25. Leimar O., Doebeli M., Dieckmann U. Evolution of phenotypic clusters through competition and local adaptation along an environmental gradient. Evolution 2008, 62:807-822.
26. Levins R. Evolution in Changing Environments 1968, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
27. MacArthur R. Species packing, and what interspecies competition minimizes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 1969, 64:1369-1371.
28. MacArthur R. Species packing and competitive equilibria for many species. Theoretical Population Biology 1970, 1:1-11.
29. MacArthur R., Levins R. The limiting similarity, convergence, and divergence of coexisting species. American Naturalist 1967, 101:377-387.
30. MacArthur R.H. Geographical Ecology 1972, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
31. Martin R.A., Pfennig D.W. Field and experimental evidence that competition and ecological opportunity promote resource polymorphism. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 2010, 100:73-88.
32. May R.M. On the theory of niche overlap. Theoretical Population Biology 1974, 5:297-332.
33. May R.M. Stability and Complexity in Model Ecosystems 1974, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
34. May R.M. Some notes on estimating the competition matrix, alpha. Ecology 1975, 56:737-741.
35. May R.M., MacArthur R.H. Niche overlap as a function of environmental variability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 1972, 69:1109-1113.
36. Meszéna G., Gyllenberg M., Pásztor L., Metz J.A.J. Competitive exclusion and limiting similarity. a unified theory. Theoretical Population Biology 2006, 69:68-87.
37. Peckarsky B.L., Abrams P.A., Bolnick D.I., Dill L.M., Grabowski J.H., Luttbeg B., Orrock J.L., Peacor S.D., Preisser E.L., Schmitz O.J., Trussell G.C. Revisiting the classics. considering nonconsumptive effects in textbook examples of predator-prey interactions. Ecology 2008, 89:2416-2425.
38. Pigolotti S., López C., Hernández-García E. Species clustering in competitive Lotka-Volterra models. Physical Review Letters 2007, 98:258101.
39. Pigolotti S., López C., Hernández-García E., Andersen K.H. How Gaussian competition leads to lumpy or uniform species distributions. Theoretical Ecology 2010, 3:89-96.
40. Preisser E.L., Bolnick D.I. The many faces of fear. comparing the pathways and impacts of nonconsumptive predator effects on prey populations. PLoS One 2008, 3:e2465.
41. Roughgarden J. Species packing and the competition function with illustrations from coral reef fish. Theoretical Population Biology 1974, 5:163-186.
42. Roughgarden J. Theory of Population Genetics and Evolutionary Ecology. An Introduction 1979, Macmillan Publishing Co.
43. Rueffler C., Van Dooren T.J.M., Leimar O., Abrams P.A. Disruptive selection and then what?. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 2006, 21:238-245.
44. Sasaki A. Clumped distribution by neighborhood competition. Journal of Theoretical Biology 1997, 186:415-430.
45. Sasaki A., Dieckmann U. Oligomorphic dynamics for analyzing the quantitative genetics of adaptive speciation. Journal of Mathematical Biology 2011, 63:601-635.
46. Sasaki A., Ellner S. The evolutionarily stable phenotype distribution in a random environment. Evolution 1995, 49:337-350.
47. Scheffer M., van Nes E.H. Self-organized similarity, the evolutionary emergence of groups of similar species. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2006, 103:6230-6235.
48. Schoener T.W. Some methods for calculating competition coefficients from resource utilization spectra. American Naturalist 1974, 108:332-340.
49. Skúlason S., Smith T.B. Resource polymorphisms in vertebrates. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 1995, 10:366-370.
50. Szabó P., Meszéna G. Limiting similarity revisited. Oikos 2006, 112:612-619.
51. Taper M.L., Case T.J. Models of character displacement and the theoretical robustness of taxon cycles. Evolution 1992, 46:317-333.
52. Thibault K.M., White E.P., Hurlbert A.H., Ernest S.K.M. Multimodality in the individual size distributions of bird communities. Global Ecology and Biogeography 2011, 20:145-153.
53. van Veen F.J.F., Morris R.J., Godfray H.C.J. Apparent competition, quantitative food webs, and the structure of phytophagous insect communities. Annual Review of Entomology 2006, 51:187-208.
54. Weiner J. Asymmetric competition in plant populations. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 1990, 5:360-364.
55. Wilson D.S. The adequacy of body size as a niche difference. American Naturalist 1975, 109:769-784.