L3 Community Responses and Population Dynamics
M Pinard BI2020
Predation
• L1 Introduction and Predation Process
• L2 Functional Responses and Predator Preferences
• L3 Community Responses and Population dynamics
– Population effects on prey, on predators
– Models of interactions and applications
Predator
Prey 2
Basal resource
Rocky shore predator and community diversity
Sessile species compete for
space.
Predation by starfish (Pisaster)
maintained the number of
coexisting species by preventing
mussel (Mytilus) from
monopolizing the space
Competitive Exclusion Principle
3
Paine 1974 Oecologia 15:93-120
Predators enhance species richness by preventing competitive exclusion
Test of Paine’s predation hypothesis in tidal pools with grazers
Predators (herbivores) maintain diversity
Initial observations supported hypothesis
Manipulation – removing and adding snails
Lubchenco J 1978 American Naturalist 112 (983): 23-39. 4
Littorina prefers to eat green
algae,
In sheltered pools, green algae
is more competitive; predation
increases diversity
In exposed pools, red algae is
more competitive, quickly
replaces green
Predator (herbivore)
preference is important
Competitive relationships
between prey species are
important
Interaction w/ physical regimes
& microhabitats
5 Lubchenco J 1978 American Naturalist 112 (983): 23-39.
Anolis lizards in the Bahamas
Spiders struggle to co-exist with lizards - why?
Spiller & Schoener (1994) Ecology 75: 182-196 6
6
Anolis lizards in the Bahamas
Intraguild predation
competition
Islands
without Lizards reduce numbers of
lizards have co-existing species
plants with (predator)
more anti- Lizards are a “protective
herbivore carnivore”
defences
Basal resource
7
Preferential browsing affects structure and composition (by
affecting competitive interactions of prey species (basal
resource)
Protected (50 yrs) from browsing: dense canopy cover Not protected from
browsing:
Lower tree biomass
Higher shrub biomass
Higher herb biomass
Less dense canopy
More mature spruce
Less mature balsam
Well-developed
understorey of shrubs
and herbs
Crawley (1996) Plant
Ecology, ch 13
8
Q- How might the presence of other species of prey affect egg hatching
success in the presence of a predator?
Species 3 Species mixed
alone
w/o w/
predator predator
# eclosed
Treatment
10 Worthen 1989 Ecological Entomology 14: 117-126
Q What might explain why when the three species of Drosophila are cultivated
together (striped bars and black bars), Drosophila tirpunctata is showing a different
pattern than Drosophila putrida and Drosophila falleni?
Worthen 1989 Ecological Entomology 14: 117-126
Q What might explain why when the three species of Drosophila are cultivated
together (striped bars and black bars), Drosophila tirpunctata is showing a different
pattern than Drosophila putrida and Drosophila falleni?
Species 1 dominant competitor, limits number of larvae of species 2 and 3 from
hatching
Support for predator hypothesis, presence of predator allows less competitive species
opportunities, thereby increasing community species richness
Worthen 1989 Ecological Entomology 14: 117-126
Key messages so far
• Experimental and observational evidence that
predators can alter prey abundance and influence
community composition
• Varies within and between systems
• Prey’s competitive ability important
• Foraging strategy of predator important
(preferences)
• Strength of interactions between predators
and trophic levels important
13
L3 Community Responses and Population Dynamics
(part two)
M Pinard BI2020
Moose arrived in early 20th century
Wolves arrives 1940
15
The Population Biology of Isle Royale Wolves and Moose: An Overview
(link to website with lots of publications and video links)
Overview of current status of two populations by lead researcher (Mic
higan Tech U)
(6.5 mins)
Wolves of Isle Royale (5.5 mins, Student Reporting Labs, PBS)
Lotka-Volterra Model
(1926, 1932)
• Used to describe the interactions of
continuously reproducing predators and
prey
• Simplification of nature but allows us a way
to examine the dynamic behaviour of the
interaction
• Two simple differential equations
17
Lotka-Volterra Model (prey)
dN/dt = rN-aPN
• Describes how population of prey is changing over time
(dN/dt)
• In absence of consumers, prey population increases
exponentially (rN, where r = constant, pop growth rate);
• Consumption rate by predators (-aPN) is a function of
attack rate (a), encounter rate (number of predators, P) and
the number of prey (N).
18
Lotka-Volterra Model (predators)
dP/dt = faPN-qP
• Describes how population of predators is changing over time
(dP/dt)
• In absence of prey, predator numbers decline exponentially
N = number of prey
through starvation (-qP, q = mortality rate);
• This is counteracted by predator birth rate which is a function
of rate food consumed (aPN) and predator’s efficiency at
turning food into offspring (f)
19
Equations can be used to explore and test
– What parameters describe a state of equilibrium, where the
predator and prey populations are neither growing nor going
extinct?
– What is the impact of introducing self-limitation to the prey
population (K, carrying capacity)?
– Can the oscillations be stabilized? How?
– How can the model be applied to resource harvesting scenarios
(e.g., determining maximum sustained yield)?
20
We can explore the equilibrium condition by solving
each equation for zero (i.e., the zero growth isocline, where predator abundance
doesn’t change, or when prey abundance doesn’t change) .
dN/dt = rN-aPN dP/dt = faPN-qP
dN/dt = 0 dP/dt = 0
0 = rN-aPN 0 = faPN-qP
-rN = -aPN qP=faPN
rN/N = aPN/N qP/P=faPN/P
r = aP q=faN
r/a = P N=q/fa
dN/dt = P = r/a dP/dt = N = q/fa
Prey zero growth isocline (horizontal) Predator zero growth isocline (vertical)
(prey pop’n will not change when predator (predator pop’n will not change when
abundance is r/a) prey abundance is q/fa)
21
The dashed lines represent the abundance where there is no change in
that axis.
dN/dt = 0 dP/dt = 0
P = r/a N = q/fa
Predator zero growth isocline
Predator abundance (P)
Predator abundance (P)
Prey zero growth isocline
r/a
Prey abundance (N) Prey abundance (N)
q/fa 22
When the zero isoclines are combined, the arrows can be
combined, joint arrows progress in a anticlockwise direction
Predator abundance (P)
Prey abundance (N)
23
The joint population moves from high predator/low prey to low
predator/low prey to low predator/high prey to high predator/high prey
to high predator/low prey
Predator abundance (P)
Prey abundance (N)
24
The model points to the tendency for fluctuations in prey
abundance to be tracked by fluctuations in predator
abundance.
Taken from Begon, figure 10.2 pg 300
25
Lag – predator ¼ cycle behind prey
Amplitude depends
on initial
population
densities
Period depends on coefficients in
model
What happens with disturbance?
See change in amplitude (e.g., start
with fewer prey)
Further from equilibrium point, greater
oscillations
26
Q – what is happening to
A prey abundance in
Predator abundance (P)
Quadrant A?
Q – what is happening to
B predator abundance in
Quadrant B?
Prey abundance (N)
27
Q – matching
a. Growth is function of intrinsic rate of increase
Prey b. Growth is function of efficiency of conversion of
food to offspring
c. Growth function of population size
d. Loss depends on size of the other’s pop’n
Predator
e. Loss depends on size of own’s pop’n
f. Loss is function of mortality
So what?
What conditions are required
How can you stabilise the for predator-mediated
populations? coexistence of two species of
– competition among prey prey?
– refuges and spatial heterogeneity
– density dependence
– predator inefficiency
29 Comins & Hassell
So what? Didinium eats Paramecium
High nutrient levels
Predator
Prey
Manipulated food input (dilute
suspensions of bacteria) for Paramecium
Low nutrient levels
Dynamics become increasingly unstable
at increasing productivity levels
Example of competition among prey
increasing stability of the system
Prey
Predator
30 Luckinbill (1974)
Huffaker
1958 - Classic experiment to demonstrate role of spatial complexity on predatory-prey stabilit
Spatial complexity, refugia and meta-populations
Summary Points
• Simple models capture dynamic interactions
• Simple features stabilize models, some destabilize
• We can learn from models
– How predators can stabilize competitive interactions, how predators
enhance prey diversity, importance of relative abilities of prey and predators
to use a shared resource
– How predator selectivity changes with prey density, environmental
conditions, . . .
• Combination of models and experimental tests progress
development of theory
34
The Population Biology of Isle Royale Wolves and Moose: An Overview
(link to website with lots of publications and video links)
Overview of current status of two populations by lead researcher (Mic
higan Tech U)
(6.5 mins)
Wolves of Isle Royale (5.5 mins, Student Reporting Labs, PBS)
MTU Professor talks about Isle Royale ecology 2011
