Emergent Allee effects in top predators feeding on structured prey populations

Top predators that forage in a purely exploitative manner on smaller stages of a size–structured prey population have been shown to exhibit an Allee effect. This Allee effect emerges from the changes that predators induce in the prey–population size distribution and represents a feedback of predator density on its own performance, in which the feedback operates through and is modified by the life history of the prey. We demonstrate that these emergent Allee effects will occur only if the prey, in the absence of predators, is regulated by density dependence in development through one of its juvenile stages, as opposed to regulation through adult fecundity. In particular, for an emergent Allee effect to occur, over–compensation is required in the maturation rate out of the regulating juvenile stage, such that a decrease in juvenile density will increase the total maturation rate to larger/older stages. If this condition is satisfied, predators with negative size selection, which forage on small prey, exhibit an emergent Allee effect, as do predators with positive size selection, which forage on large adult prey. By contrast, predators that forage on juveniles in the regulating stage never exhibit emergent Allee effects. We conclude that the basic life–history characteristics of many species make them prone to exhibiting emergent Allee effects, resulting in an increased likelihood that communities possess alternative stable states or exhibit catastrophic shifts in structure and dynamics.

[1]  P. Amundsen,et al.  Takvatn Through 20 Years: Long-term Effects of an Experimental Mass Removal of Arctic Charr, Salvelinus Alpinus, From a Subarctic Lake , 2002, Environmental Biology of Fishes.

[2]  Horst R. Thieme,et al.  Mathematics in Population Biology , 2003 .

[3]  Lennart Persson,et al.  Size-dependent life-history traits promote catastrophic collapses of top predators , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[4]  A. D. de Roos,et al.  Impact of Intraguild Predation and Stage Structure on Simple Communities along a Productivity Gradient , 2001, The American Naturalist.

[5]  S. Diehl,et al.  Size-dependent foraging efficiency, cannibalism and zooplankton community structure , 2000, Oecologia.

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

[7]  Jonathan M. Chase Food Web Effects of Prey Size Refugia: Variable Interactions and Alternative Stable Equilibria , 1999, The American Naturalist.

[8]  Stephens,et al.  Consequences of the Allee effect for behaviour, ecology and conservation. , 1999, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[9]  G. Polis,et al.  PHENOLOGY AND LIFE HISTORY OF THE DESERT SPIDER, DIGUETIA MOJAVEA (ARANEAE, DIGUETIDAE) , 1999 .

[10]  Y. Kuznetsov Elements of applied bifurcation theory (2nd ed.) , 1998 .

[11]  M. Longair The Theoretical Framework , 1998 .

[12]  Jonathan M. Chase,et al.  Species Turnover and the Regulation of Trophic Structure , 1997 .

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

[14]  J. Elser,et al.  Effects of Food Web Compensation After Manipulation of Rainbow Trout in an Oligotrophic Lake , 1995 .

[15]  C. Kolar,et al.  Theory and Application in Fish Feeding Ecology , 1994 .

[16]  K. Hambright Morphological constraints in the piscivore-planktivore interaction: Implications for the trophic cascade hypothesis , 1994 .

[17]  E. Werner Ontogenetic Scaling of Competitive Relations: Size‐Dependent Effects and Responses in Two Anuran Larvae , 1994 .

[18]  P. Amundsen,et al.  Rehabilitation of a Stunted Population of Arctic Char by Intensive Fishing , 1993 .

[19]  I. Holopainen,et al.  Piscivory and Recruitment: Mechanisms Structuring Prey Populations in Small Lakes , 1992 .

[20]  M. A. Leibold,et al.  Resource Edibility and the Effects of Predators and Productivity on the Outcome of Trophic Interactions , 1989, The American Naturalist.

[21]  H. Wilbur Interactions Between Growing Predators and Growing Prey , 1988 .

[22]  W. Murdoch,et al.  Cyclic and Stable Populations: Plankton as Paradigm , 1987, The American Naturalist.

[23]  R. Jefferies,et al.  Changes in the composition and standing crop of salt-marsh communities in response to the removal of a grazer , 1986 .

[24]  R. Paine,et al.  Perturbation and Recovery Patterns of Starfish-Dominated Intertidal Assemblages in Chile, New Zealand, and Washington State , 1985, The American Naturalist.

[25]  L. Oksanen,et al.  Exploitation Ecosystems in Gradients of Primary Productivity , 1981, The American Naturalist.

[26]  T. Zaret Predation and freshwater communities , 1980 .

[27]  D. J. Hall,et al.  The Size-Efficiency Hypothesis and the Size Structure of Zooplankton Communities , 1976 .

[28]  R. Paine,et al.  Size-Limited Predation: An Observational and Experimental Approach with the Mytilus-Pisaster Interaction , 1976 .

[29]  S. Dodson,et al.  Predation, Body Size, and Composition of Plankton. , 1965, Science.