BREEDING SUPPRESSION AND PREDATOR–PREY DYNAMICS

In a biotic environment, current reproduction will affect future population sizes, but these future changes may also affect the optimality of current reproductive decisions. We investigate the dynamics of predator–prey cycles if both predators and prey respond to each other’s (and their own) population density by adjusting their breeding effort. We find that adaptive breeding strategies of predators can produce equally profound changes to the dynamics as those produced by analogous strategies of their prey. Contrary to earlier, more limited models, we find that breeding suppression can be either destabilizing (i.e., generating cycles or chaotic behavior) or stabilizing, in cases where predators, prey, or both can adopt adjustable strategies. The direction of change depends on the shape of the density dependence in the growth rates, as well as how it is affected by the breeding decisions. We discuss these findings in light of the Fennoscandian vole cycle, where antipredatory behavior of voles has been evoked to explain some properties of the cycle, and where many predators show pronounced variability in their breeding effort according to the phase of the cycle.

[1]  Robert M. May,et al.  Stability and Complexity in Model Ecosystems , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[2]  D. Tinkle,et al.  Natural selection and the evolution of reproductive effort. , 1975, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[3]  F. H. Rodd,et al.  The spring decline in the meadow vole, Microtus pennsylvanicus: the effect of density , 1984 .

[4]  P. Barnard,et al.  The influence of microtines on polygyny, productivity, age, and provisioning of breeding Northern Harriers: a 5-year study , 1986 .

[5]  E. Korpimäki Timing of breeding of Tengmalm's Owl Aegolius funereus in relation to vole dynamics in western Finland , 1987 .

[6]  H. Pietiainen Breeding season quality, age, and the effect of experience on the reproductive success of the Ural owls (Strix uralensis) , 1988 .

[7]  C. Magnhagen Predation risk as a cost of reproduction. , 1991, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[8]  Derek A. Roff,et al.  The evolution of life histories : theory and analysis , 1992 .

[9]  O. Mustonen,et al.  Influence of predation risk on early development and maturation in three species of Clethrionomys voles , 1993 .

[10]  Erkki Korpimäki,et al.  Population oscillations of boreal rodents: regulation by mustelid predators leads to chaos , 1993, Nature.

[11]  H. Kolunen,et al.  Female body condition and breeding of the Ural owl Strix uralensis , 1993 .

[12]  Demography and regulation of breeding density in the field vole, Microtus agrestis , 1993 .

[13]  T. Mappes,et al.  Selective avian predation on a population of the field vole, Microtus agrestis: greater vulnerability of males and subordinates , 1993 .

[14]  M. Mangel,et al.  Clutch size, offspring performance, and intergenerational fitness , 1994 .

[15]  H. Ylönen Vole cycles and antipredatory behaviour. , 1994, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[16]  R. Ostfeld,et al.  DENSITY-DEPENDENT PROCESSES IN MEADOW VOLES: AN EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH' , 1995 .

[17]  N. Yoccoz,et al.  Vole cycles. , 1995, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[18]  E. Korpimäki,et al.  Does predation risk constrain maturation in cyclic vole populations , 1995 .

[19]  A. Angerbjörn,et al.  THE ARCTIC FOX POPULATION IN FINNISH LAPLAND DURING 30 YEARS, 1964-93 , 1995 .

[20]  K. Norrdahl POPULATION CYCLES IN NORTHERN SMALL MAMMALS , 1995, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[21]  A. Angerbjörn,et al.  Dynamics of the Arctic Fox Population in Sweden , 1995 .

[22]  C. Francis,et al.  SURVIVAL OF GREAT HORNED OWLS IN RELATION TO THE SNOWSHOE HARE CYCLE , 1995 .

[23]  E. Koskela,et al.  Suppressed breeding in the field vole (Microtus agrestis): an adaptation to cyclically fluctuating predation risk , 1995 .

[24]  Erkki Korpimäki,et al.  Predation and Population Cycles of Small Mammals A reassessment of the predation hypothesis , 1996 .

[25]  W. Sutherland From Individual Behaviour to Population Ecology , 1996 .

[26]  H. Kokko,et al.  Evolutionary optimality of delayed breeding in voles , 1996 .

[27]  I. Hanski,et al.  A predator-prey model with optimal suppression of reproduction in the prey. , 1996, Mathematical biosciences.

[28]  C. Rohner The numerical response of great horned owls to the snowshoe hare cycle : consequences of non-territorial 'floaters' on demography , 1996 .

[29]  T. Mappes,et al.  Reproductive effort of female bank voles in a risky environment , 1997, Evolutionary Ecology.

[30]  P. Abrams,et al.  PREY ADAPTATION AS A CAUSE OF PREDATOR‐PREY CYCLES , 1997, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[31]  Takashi Saitoh,et al.  Density dependence in fluctuating grey-sided vole populations , 1997 .

[32]  S. L. Lima,et al.  Predator–induced breeding suppression and its consequences for predator–prey population dynamics , 1997, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[33]  J. Wolff,et al.  Response of gray-tailed voles to odours of a mustelid predator : a field test , 1997 .

[34]  A. Angerbjörn,et al.  Fluctuating Resources and the Evolution of Litter Size in the Arctic Fox , 1998 .

[35]  T. Klemola,et al.  Does avian predation risk depress reproduction of voles? , 1998, Oecologia.

[36]  E. Korpimäki,et al.  Clutch size of kestrels : seasonal decline and experimental evidence for food limitation under fluctuating food conditions , 1998 .

[37]  T. Mappes,et al.  Breeding Suppression in Voles under Predation Risk of Small Mustelids: Laboratory or Methodological Artifact? , 1998 .

[38]  N. Stenseth,et al.  Delayed maturation in female bank voles: optimal decision or social constraint? , 1999 .