Type 3 functional response of mice to gypsy moth pupae: Is it stabilizing?

Oikos

Volumn 107, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 592-602

  Schauber, Eric M ^a   Ostfeld, Richard S ^b   Jones, Clive G ^b  

^a SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b CARY INSTITUTE OF ECOSYSTEM STUDIES   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FUNCTIONAL RESPONSE; LOCAL EXTINCTION; POPULATION DENSITY; PREDATION; PREDATOR-PREY INTERACTION; RODENT;

NEW YORK [UNITED STATES]; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES; WESTERN HEMISPHERE; WORLD;

CRICETINAE; LEPIDOPTERA; LYMANTRIA; LYMANTRIA DISPAR; PEROMYSCUS; PEROMYSCUS LEUCOPUS; QUERCUS;

EID: 8744221453     PISSN: 00301299     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.0030-1299.2004.13606.x     Document Type: Article

References (82)

1. Abrams, P. A. and Ginzburg, L. R. 2000. The nature of predation: prey dependent, ratio dependent or neither? - Trends Ecol. Evol. 15: 337-341.
2. Amezcua, A. B. and Holyoak, M. 2000. Empirical evidence for predator-prey source-sink dynamics. - Ecology 81: 3081-3098.
3. Arnason, A. N. and Schwartz, C. J. 1999. Using POPAN-5 to analyze banding data. - Bird Study 46 (suppl.): S127-S168.
4. Baker, W. L. 1941. Effect of gypsy moth defoliation on certain forest trees. - J. For. 39: 1017-1022.
5. Berec, L. and Krivan, V. 2000. A mechanistic model for partial preferences. - Theor. Popul. Biol. 58: 279-289.
6. Berryman, A. A. 1991. The gypsy moth in North America: a case of successful biological control? - Trends Ecol. Evol. 6: 110-111.
7. Bess, H. A., Spurr, S. H. and Littlefield, E. W. 1947. Forest site conditions and the gypsy moth. - Harvard For. Bull. 22.
8. Campbell, R. W. 1975. The gypsy moth and its natural enemies. Agri. Inf. Bull. 381. - U. S. Dept. Agric.
9. Campbell, R. W. 1976. Comparative analysis of numerically stable and violently fluctuating gypsy moth populations. - Environ. Entomol. 5: 1218-1224.
10. Campbell, R. W. and Sloan, R. J. 1976. Influence of behavioral evolution on gypsy moth pupal survival in sparse populations. - Environ. Entomol. 5: 1211-1217.
11. Campbell, R. W. and Sloan, R. J. 1977. Natural regulation of innocuous gypsy moth populations. - Environ. Entomol. 6: 315-322.
12. Campbell, R. W., Hubbard, D. L. and Sloan, R. J. 1975a. Location of gypsy moth pupae and subsequent pupal survival in sparse, stable populations. - Environ. Entomol. 4: 597-600.
13. Campbell, R. W., Hubbard, D. L. and Sloan, R. J. 1975b. Patterns of gypsy moth occurrence within a sparse and numerically stable population. - Environ. Entomol. 4: 535-542.
14. Charnov, E. L. 1976. Optimal foraging: the marginal value theorem. - Theor. Popul. Biol. 9: 129-136.
15. Cook, S. P., Smith, H. R., Hain, F. P. et al. 1995. Predation of gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) pupae by invertebrates at low small mammal population densities. - Environ. Entomol. 24: 1234-1238.
16. Duncan, R. S., Wenny, D. G., Spritzer, M. D. et al. 2002. Does human scent bias seed removal studies? - Ecology 83: 2630-2636.
17. Dwyer, G., Dushoff, J., Elkinton, J. S. et al. 2000. Pathogen-driven outbreaks in forest defoliators revisited: building models from experimental data. - Am. Nat. 156: 105-120.
18. Elkinton, J. S. and Liebhold, A. M. 1990. Population dynamics of gypsy moth in North America. - Annu. Rev. Entomol. 35: 571-596.
19. Elkinton, J. S., Gould, J. R., Liebhold, A. M. et al. 1989. Are gypsy moth populations in North America regulated at low density? - In: Wallner, W. E. and McManus, K. A. (eds), Lymantriidae: a comparison of features of New and Old World tussock moths. USDA Forest Service, Northeastern For. Exp. Stn, pp. 233-249.
20. Elkinton, J. S., Healy, W. M., Buonaccorsi, J. P. et al. 1996. Interactions among gypsy moths, white-footed mice, and acorns. - Ecology 77: 2332-2342.
21. Forbush, E. H. and Fernald, C. H. 1896. The gypsy moth. - Wright and Potter.
22. Gould, J. R., Elkinton, J. S. and Wallner, W. E. 1990. Density-dependent suppression of experimentally created gypsy moth, Lymantria dispar (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae), populations by natural enemies. - J. Anim. Ecol. 59: 213-233.
23. Graves, S., Maldonado, J. and Wolff, J. O. 1988. Use of ground and arboreal microhabitats by Peromyscus leucopus and Peromyscus maniculatus. - Can. J. Zool. 66: 277-278.
24. Gray, R. D. 1987. Faith and foraging: a critique of the "paradigm argument from design". - In: Kamil, A. C., Krebs, J. R. and Pulliam, H. R. (eds), Foraging behavior. Plenum, pp. 69-140.
25. Grushecky, S. T., Liebhold, A. M., Greer, R. et al. 1998. Does forest thinning affect predation on gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) larvae and pupae? - Environ. Entomol. 27: 268-276.
26. Gschwantner, T., Hoch, G. and Schopf, A. 2002. Impact of predators on artificially augmented populations of Lymantria dispar L. pupae (Lep., Lymantriidae). - J. Appl. Entomol. 126: 66-73.
27. Hajek, A. E., Larkin, T. S., Carruthers, R. I. et al. 1993. Modeling the dynamics of Entomophaga maimaiga (Zygomycetes: Entomophthorales) epizootics in gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) populations. - Environ. Entomol. 22: 1172-1187.
28. Hassell, M. P. 1978. Arthropod predator-prey systems. - Princeton Univ. Press
29. Hassell, M. P., Lawton, J. H. and Beddington, J. R. 1977. Sigmoid functional responses by invertebrate predators and parasitoids. - J. Anim. Ecol. 46: 249-262.
30. Hastings, F. L., Hain, F. P., Smith, H. R. et al. 2002. Predation of gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) pupae in three ecosystems along the southern edge of infestation. - Environ. Entomol. 31: 668-675.
31. Hilborn, R. 1975. The effect of spatial heterogeneity on the persistence of predator-prey interactions. - Theor. Popul. Biol. 8: 346-355.
32. Holling, C. S. 1959a. Some characteristics of simple types of predation and parasitism. - Can. Entomol. 91: 385-398.
33. Holling, C. S. 1959b. The components of predation as revealed by a study of small-mammal predation of the European pine sawfly. - Can. Entomol. 91: 293-320.
34. Huffaker, C. B. 1958. Experimental studies on predation: dispersion factor and predator-prey oscillations. - Hilgardia 27: 343-383.
35. Jefferies, R. L. and Lawton, J. H. 1984. Enemy-free space and the structure of ecological communities. - Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 23: 269-286.
36. Jolly, G. M. 1965. Explicit estimates from capture-recapture data with both death and immigration-stochastic model. - Biometrika 52: 225-247.
37. Joly, D. O. and Patterson, B. R. 2003. Use of selection indices to model the functional response of predators. - Ecology 84: 1635-1639.
38. Jones, C. G., Ostfeld, R. S., Richard, M. P. et al. 1998. Chain reactions linking acorns to gypsy moth outbreaks and Lyme disease risk. - Science 279: 1023-1026.
39. Juliano, S. A. 1993. Non-linear curve fitting: predation and functional response curves. - In: Scheiner, S. M. and Gurevitch, J. (eds), Design and analysis of ecological experiments. Chapman and Hall, pp. 159-182.
40. Kareiva, P. and Odell, G. 1987. Swarms of predators exhibit "prey taxis" if individual predators use area-restricted search. - Am. Nat. 130: 233-270.
41. Kegg, J. D. 1973. Oak mortality caused by repeated gypsy moth defoliations in New Jersey. - J. Econ. Entomol. 66: 639-641.
42. Koenig, W. D. 1999. Spatial autocorrelation in ecological studies. - Trends Ecol. Evol 14: 22-26.
43. Lance, D. R., Elkinton, J. S. and Schwalbe, C. P. 1987. Behaviour of late-instar gypsy moth larvae in high and low density populations. - Ecol. Entomol. 12: 267-273.
44. Lewis, M. A. and Murray, J. D. 1993. Modelling territoriality and wolf-deer interactions. - Nature 366: 738-740.
45. Liebhold, A. M., Halverson, J. A. and Elmes, G. A. 1992. Gypsy moth invasion in North America: a quantitative analysis. - J. Biogeogr. 19: 513-520.
46. Liebhold, A. M., Simons, E. E., Sior, A. et al. 1993. Forecasting defoliation caused by the gypsy moth from field measurements. - Environ. Entomol. 22: 26-32.
47. Liebhold, A. M., Higashiura, Y. and Unno, A. 1998. Forest type affects predation on gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) pupae in Japan. - Environ. Entomol. 27: 858-862.
48. Liebhold, A., Elkinton, J., Williams, D. et al. 2000. What causes outbreaks of the gypsy moth in North America? - Popul. Ecol. 42: 257-266.
49. MacArthur, R. H. and Pianka, E. R. 1966. On the optimal use of a patchy environment. - Am. Nat. 100: 603-609.
50. Manson, R. H. 2000. Spatial autocorrelation and the interpretation of patterns of tree seed and seedling predation by rodents in old-fields. - Oikos 91: 162-174.
51. Manville, C. J., Barnum, S. A. and Tester, J. R. 1992. Influence of bait on arboreal behavior of Peromyscus leucopus. - J. Mammal. 73: 335-336.
52. McCracken, K. E., Witham, J. W. and Hunter, M. L., Jr. 1999. Relationships between seed fall of three tree species and Peromyscus leucopus and Clethrionomys gapperi during 10 years in an oak-pine forest. - J. Mammal. 80: 1288-1296.
53. McMillan, B. R. and Kaufman, D. W. 1995. Travel path characteristics for free-living white-footed mice (Peromyscus leucopus). - Can. J. Zool. 73: 1474-1478.
54. Moore, K. E. B. and Jones, C. G. 1992. Estimating field hatch of gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae). - Environ. Entomol. 21: 276-280.
55. Murdoch, W. W. 1969. Switching in general predators: experiments on predator specificity and stability of prey populations. - Ecol. Monogr. 39: 335-354.
56. Murdoch, W. W. and Oaten, A. 1975. Predation and population stability. - Adv. Ecol. Res. 9: 1-131.
57. Murdoch, W. W. and Bence, J. 1987. General predators and unstable prey populations. - In: Kerfoot, W. C. and Sih, A. (eds), Predation: direct and indirect impacts on aquatic communities. Univ. Press of New England, pp. 17-30.
58. Orians, C. M. and Pearson, N. E. 1979. On the theory of central-place foraging. - In: Horn, D. H., Mitchell, R. and Stairs, G. R. (eds), Analysis of ecological systems. Ohio State Univ. Press, pp. 155-177.
59. Ostfeld, R. S., Jones, C. G. and Wolff, J. O. 1996. Of mice and mast. - Bioscience 46: 323-330.
60. Real, L. A. 1977. The kinetics of functional response. - Am. Nat. 111: 289-300.
61. Royama, T. 1970. Factors governing the hunting behaviour and selection of food by the great tit (Parus major L.). - J. Anim. Ecol. 39: 619-668.
62. Schauber, E. M. 2000. Models of mast-seeding and its ecological effects on gypsy moth populations and Lyme-disease risk. Ph.D. thesis, Univ. of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut, USA.
63. Schmidt, K. A., Goheen, J. R. and Naumann, R. 2001. Incidental nest predation in songbirds: behavioral indicators detect ecological scales and processes. - Ecology 82: 2937-2947.
64. Seber, G. A. F. 1965. A note on the multiple recapture census. - Biometrika 52: 249-259.
65. Sinclair, A. R. E. and Pech, R. P. 1996. Density dependence, stochasticity, compensation and predator regulation. - Oikos 75: 164-173.
66. Sinclair, A. R. E., Pech, R. P., Dickman, C. R. et al. 1998. Predicting effects of predation on conservation of endangered prey. - Conserv. Biol. 12: 564-575.
67. Smith, H. R. 1985. Wildlife and the gypsy moth. - Wildlife Soc. Bull. 13: 166-174.
68. Smith, H. R. and Lautenschlager, R. A. 1981. Gypsy moth predators. - In: Doane, C. C. and McManus, M. L. (eds), The gypsy moth: research toward integrated pest management. U.S. Dept. Agric, pp. 96-124.
69. Solomon, M. E. 1949. The natural control of animal populations. - J. Anim. Ecol. 18: 1-35.
70. Stickel, L. F. 1968. Home range and travels. - In: King, J. A. (ed.), Biology of Peromyscus (Rodentia). Am. Soc. of Mammal., pp. 373-411.
71. Tinbergen, L. 1960. The natural control of insects in pinewoods. 1. Factors influencing the intensity of predation by song-birds. - Nérlandaise Zool. 13: 265-343.
72. Tinbergen, N., Impekoven, M. and Franck, D. 1967. An experiment on spacing out as a defence against predation. - Behaviour 28: 307-321.
73. Trexler, J. C., McCulloch, C. E. and Travis, J. 1988. How can the functional response best be determined? - Oecologia. 76: 206-214.
74. Turchin, P. and Hanski, I. 1997. An empirically based model for latitudinal gradient in vole population dynamics. - Am. Nat. 149: 842-874.
75. van Baalen, M., Krivan, V., van Rijn, P. C. J. et al. 2001. Alternative food, switching predators, and the persistence of predator-prey systems. - Am. Nat. 157: 512-524.
76. Williams, D. W., Fuester, R. W., Metterhouse, W. W. et al. 1990. Density, size, and mortality of egg masses in New Jersey populations of the gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae). - Environ. Entomol. 19: 943-948.
77. Williams, D. W., Fuester, R. W., Metterhouse, W. W. et al. 1992. Incidence and ecological relationships of parasitism in larval populations of Lymantria dispar (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae). - Biol. Cont. 2: 35-43.
78. Wolff, J. O. 1985. The effects of density, food, and interspecific interference on home range size in Peromyscus leucopus and Peromyscus maniculatus. - Can. J. Zool. 63: 2657-2662.
79. Wolff, J. O. 1986. The effects of food on midsummer demography of white-footed mice, Peromyscus leucopus. - Can. J. Zool. 64: 855-858.
80. Wolff, J. O. 1996. Population fluctuations of mast-eating rodents are correlated with production of acorns. - J. Mammal. 77: 850-856.
81. Wolff, J. O., Dueser, R. D. and Berry, K. S. 1985. Food habits of sympatric Peromyscus leucopus and Peromyscus maniculatus. - J. Mammal. 66: 795-798.
82. Woods, S. A., Elkinton, J. S., Murray, K. D. et al. 1991. Transmission dynamics of a nuclear polyhedrosis virus and predicting mortality in gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) populations. - J. Econ. Entomol. 84: 423-430.