Spatial Dynamics of Communities with Intraguild Predation: The Role of Dispersal Strategies

I investigate the influence of dispersal strategies on intraguild prey and predators (competing species that prey on each other). I find an asymmetry between the intraguild prey and predator in their responses to each other’s dispersal. The intraguild predator’s dispersal strategy and dispersal behavior have strong effects on the intraguild prey’s abundance pattern, but the intraguild prey’s dispersal strategy and behavior have little or no effect on the intraguild predator’s abundance pattern. This asymmetry arises from the different constraints faced by the two species: the intraguild prey has to acquire resources while avoiding predation, but the intraguild predator only has to acquire resources. It leads to puzzling distribution patterns: when the intraguild prey and predator both move away from areas of high density, they become aggregated to high‐density habitats, but when they both move toward areas of high resource productivity, they become segregated to resource‐poor and resource‐rich habitats. Aggregation is more likely when dispersal is random or less optimal, and segregation is more likely as dispersal becomes more optimal. The crucial implication is that trophic constraints dictate the fitness benefits of using dispersal strategies to sample environmental heterogeneity. A strategy that affords greater benefits to an intraguild predator can lead to a more optimal outcome for both the intraguild predator and prey than a strategy that affords greater benefits to an intraguild prey.

[1]  J. Travis,et al.  The evolution of density–dependent dispersal , 1999, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[2]  S. Diehl,et al.  Effects of Enrichment on Three‐Level Food Chains with Omnivory , 2000, The American Naturalist.

[3]  R. Denno,et al.  Density-Related Migration in Planthoppers (Homoptera: Delphacidae): The Role of Habitat Persistence , 1991, The American Naturalist.

[4]  Allan Stewart-Oaten,et al.  Aggregation and Stability in Metapopulation Models , 1992, The American Naturalist.

[5]  Jan Eisner,et al.  Optimal foraging and predator-prey dynamics III. , 1996, Theoretical population biology.

[6]  P. Amarasekare Coexistence of competing parasitoids on a patchily distributed host: local vs. spatial mechanisms , 2000 .

[7]  I. Hanski,et al.  Spatial dynamics of two competing specialist parasitoids in a host metapopulation , 1998 .

[8]  W. Wilson,et al.  Coexistence of competitors in metacommunities due to spatial variation in resource growth rates; does R* predict the outcome of competition? , 2004 .

[9]  J. Roughgarden,et al.  DISTURBANCE INDUCES THE CONTRASTING EVOLUTION OF REINFORCEMENT AND DISPERSIVENESS IS DIRECTED AND RANDOM MOVERS , 2005, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[10]  W. Gurney,et al.  Modelling fluctuating populations , 1982 .

[11]  D. Hart,et al.  Density-dependent dispersal of black fly neonates is mediated by flow , 1996 .

[12]  R. Holt Population dynamics in two-patch environments: Some anomalous consequences of an optimal habitat distribution , 1985 .

[13]  Priyanga Amarasekare,et al.  Spatial Heterogeneity, Source‐Sink Dynamics, and the Local Coexistence of Competing Species , 2001, The American Naturalist.

[14]  B. Menge,et al.  Keystone predation and interaction strength : Interactive effects of predators on their main prey , 1996 .

[15]  Jonathan M. Chase,et al.  Strong and weak trophic cascades along a productivity gradient , 2003 .

[16]  Heidemarie Steltzer,et al.  Intraguild predation and cannibalism among larvae of detritivorous caddisflies in subalpine wetlands , 1996 .

[17]  Jonathan M. Chase,et al.  The metacommunity concept: a framework for multi-scale community ecology , 2004 .

[18]  R. Holt,et al.  Impacts of temporal variation on apparent competition and coexistence in open ecosystems , 2003 .

[19]  N. Rashevsky,et al.  Mathematical biology , 1961, Connecticut medicine.

[20]  Robert D. Holt,et al.  Optimal Foraging and the Form of the Predator Isocline , 1983, The American Naturalist.

[21]  R. Holt,et al.  The Effects of Enrichment on the Dynamics of Apparent Competitive Interactions in Stage‐Structured Systems , 2003, The American Naturalist.

[22]  M. McPeek,et al.  The Evolution of Dispersal in Spatially and Temporally Varying Environments , 1992, The American Naturalist.

[23]  G. Polis,et al.  THE ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION OF INTRAGUILD PREDATION: Potential Competitors That Eat Each Other , 1989 .

[24]  C. Thomas,et al.  Testing a Metapopulation Model of Coexistence in the Insect Community on Ragwort (Senecio jacobaea) , 1995, The American Naturalist.

[25]  P. Abrams,et al.  Transient Dynamics Limit the Effectiveness of Keystone Predation in Bringing about Coexistence , 2005, The American Naturalist.

[26]  Nicolas Mouquet,et al.  Mechanisms of Coexistence in Competitive Metacommunities , 2004, The American Naturalist.

[27]  G. Gries,et al.  DENSITY AND PUPATION SITE OF APTEROUS FEMALE BAGWORMS, METISA PLANA (LEPIDOPTERA: PSYCHIDAE), INFLUENCE THE DISTRIBUTION OF EMERGENT LARVAE , 1998, The Canadian Entomologist.

[28]  C. Codeço,et al.  Competition along a Spatial Gradient of Resource Supply: A Microbial Experimental Model , 2001, The American Naturalist.

[29]  Mark A. McPeek,et al.  Predation, Competition, and Prey Communities: A Review of Field Experiments , 1985 .

[30]  G. Nachman,et al.  Female‐biased density‐dependent dispersal of a tephritid fly in a fragmented habitat and its implications for population regulation , 2001 .

[31]  P. Amarasekare Diversity–stability relationships in multitrophic systems: an empirical exploration , 2003 .

[32]  Priyanga Amarasekare,et al.  Spatial dynamics of mutualistic interactions , 2004 .

[33]  Jonathan M. Chase,et al.  Spatial scale dictates the productivity–biodiversity relationship , 2002, Nature.

[34]  S. Levin Dispersion and Population Interactions , 1974, The American Naturalist.

[35]  A. Herzig Effects of Population Density on Long‐Distance Dispersal in the Goldenrod Beetle Trirhabda Virgata , 1995 .

[36]  Jonathan M. Chase,et al.  Connectivity, scale‐dependence, and the productivity–diversity relationship , 2004 .

[37]  Robert D. Holt,et al.  A Theoretical Framework for Intraguild Predation , 1997, The American Naturalist.

[38]  DIVERGENT EVOLUTION OF DISPERSAL IN A HETEROGENEOUS LANDSCAPE , 2001, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[39]  M. J. Hatcher,et al.  The replacement of a native freshwater amphipod by an invader: roles for environmental degradation and intraguild predation , 2004 .

[40]  J. Roughgarden,et al.  The Impact of Directed versus Random Movement on Population Dynamics and Biodiversity Patterns , 2005, The American Naturalist.

[41]  V. Křivan,et al.  Optimal Foraging and Predator-Prey Dynamics , 1996, Theoretical population biology.

[42]  Rolf A Ims,et al.  Population Dynamic and Genetic Consequences of Spatial Density‐Dependent Dispersal in Patchy Populations , 2000, The American Naturalist.

[43]  V. Jansen,et al.  The dynamics of two diffusively coupled predator-prey populations. , 2001, Theoretical population biology.

[44]  Pablo A. Marquet,et al.  Intraguild predation: a widespread interaction related to species biology , 2004 .

[45]  P. Abrams Habitat Choice in Predator‐Prey Systems: Spatial Instability due to Interacting Adaptive Movements , 2007, The American Naturalist.

[46]  Priyanga Amarasekare,et al.  Productivity, dispersal and the coexistence of intraguild predators and prey. , 2006, Journal of theoretical biology.

[47]  K. Parvinen,et al.  Evolutionary branching of dispersal strategies in structured metapopulations , 2002, Journal of mathematical biology.

[48]  D. Tilman Resource competition and community structure. , 1983, Monographs in population biology.

[49]  B. Bolker,et al.  Spatial Moment Equations for Plant Competition: Understanding Spatial Strategies and the Advantages of Short Dispersal , 1999, The American Naturalist.

[50]  James P. Grover,et al.  Simple Rules for Interspecific Dominance in Systems with Exploitative and Apparent Competition , 1994, The American Naturalist.