Demographic costs of Chaoborus-induced defences in Daphnia pulex: a sensitivity analysis

SummaryWe examined the demographic costs of Chaoborus-induced defensive spine structures in Daphnia pulex. Our aim was to assess the role of resource limitation and the interaction effects of limiting food level and antipredator structures on fitness of D. pulex and to pinpoint those life stages that are most sensitive to changes in the defence regime. Chaoborus-induced and typical morphotypes of D. pulex were reared at high and low food concentrations. Instar-based matrix population models were used to quantify the effects of predator-induction, food and their interaction on fitness of D. pulex. Predator-induction caused a statistically significant reduction in fitness at low food levels, but not at high food levels. Sensitivity analyses revealed that the fitness effects were primarily due to changes in the growth rate in instars 1–5, and secondarily to small reductions in the fertility of instars 5–10. The interaction between Chaoborus exposure and low food concentration was negative, and mediated through growth and fertility components. Both these components were reduced more in the Chaoborus-exposed, low food treatment than would be expected in the absence of interaction.

[1]  Experimental studies on factors limiting colonization by Daphnia pulex Leydig of coastal montane lakes in British Columbia , 1978 .

[2]  Joseph S. Meyer,et al.  Estimating Uncertainty in Population Growth Rates: Jackknife vs. Bootstrap Techniques , 1986 .

[3]  C. Harvell,et al.  The Ecology and Evolution of Inducible Defenses in a Marine Bryozoan: Cues, Costs, and Consequences , 1986, The American Naturalist.

[4]  K. Spitze.  Functional response of an ambush predator: Chaoborus americanus predation on Daphnia pulex , 1985 .

[5]  M. Rausher,et al.  Costs and Benefits of Plant Resistance to Herbivory , 1987, The American Naturalist.

[6]  H. Caswell.  Analysis of life table response experiments I. Decomposition of effects on population growth rate , 1989 .

[7]  M. Walls,et al.  Effects of predator-induced spines on individual fitness in Daphnia pulex , 1989 .

[8]  S. Dodson,et al.  Reproductive costs of Chaoborus-induced polymorphism in Daphnia pulex , 1987, Hydrobiologia.

[9]  S. T. Buckland,et al.  Computer-Intensive Methods for Testing Hypotheses. , 1990 .

[10]  J. J. Gilbert,et al.  Asplanchna-induced polymorphism in the rotifer Keratella slacki1 , 1984 .

[11]  S. Dodson,et al.  Progress towards characterization of a predator/prey kairomone: Daphnia pulex and Chaoborus americanus , 1990, Hydrobiologia.

[12]  M. Hrbáčková‐Esslová.  The Development of three Species of Daphnia in the Surface Water of the Slapy Reservoir , 1963 .

[13]  J. Havel.  Cyclomorphosis of Daphnia pulex spined morphs1 , 1985 .

[14]  H. Waris.  The Significance for Algae of Chelating Substances in the Nutrient Solutions , 1953 .

[15]  F. Stuart Chapin,et al.  Resource Availability and Plant Antiherbivore Defense , 1985, Science.

[16]  Andrew Sih,et al.  Predation: direct and indirect impacts on aquatic communities , 1988 .

[17]  Brian Charlesworth,et al.  Evolution in Age-Structured Populations. , 1983 .

[18]  C. Lively.  COMPETITION, COMPARATIVE LIFE HISTORIES, AND MAINTENANCE OF SHELL DIMORPHISM IN A BARNACLE' , 1986 .

[19]  C. Harvell.  Predator-Induced Defense in a Marine Bryozoan , 1984, Science.

[20]  H. Caswell.  Matrix population models : construction, analysis, and interpretation , 2001 .

[21]  R. Lande,et al.  A Quantitative Genetic Theory of Life History Evolution , 1982 .

[22]  R. S. Stemberger.  Reproductive costs and hydrodynamic benefits of chemically induced defenses in Keratella testudo , 1988 .

[23]  S. Dodson,et al.  Chaoborus predation on typical and spined morphs of Daphnia pulex: Behavioral observations1 , 1984 .

[24]  H. Caswell.  Approaching Size and Age in Matrix Population Models , 1988 .

[25]  S. Dodson,et al.  Demographic costs of Chaoborus-induced phenotypic plasticity in Daphnia pulex , 1990, Oecologia.

[26]  H. Caswell.  Stable Population Structure and Reproductive Value for Populations with Complex Life Cycles , 1982 .

[27]  S. Dodson.  The ecological role of chemical stimuli for the zooplankton: predator-induced morphology in Daphnia , 1989, Oecologia.

[28]  H. Caswell,et al.  Demographic Consequences of Larval Development Mode: Planktotrophy vs. Lecithotrophy in Streblospio Benedicti. , 1987, Ecology.

[29]  I. Vuorinen,et al.  Defensive spine formation in Daphnia pulex Leydig and induction by Chaoborus crystallinus De Geer , 1989 .

[30]  W. G. Sprules,et al.  Demographic Costs of Antipredator Defenses in Daphnia Pulex , 1990 .

[31]  S. Dodson,et al.  Embryological induction and predation ecology in Daphnia pulex , 1981 .

[32]  J. H. Zar,et al.  Biostatistical Analysis (5th Edition) , 1984 .

[33]  J. Schultz.  Plant responses induced by herbivores. , 1988, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[34]  F. Adler,et al.  Inducible defenses, phenotypic variability and biotic environments. , 1990, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[35]  R. Tollrian,et al.  The Ecology and Evolution of Inducible Defenses , 1990, The Quarterly Review of Biology.