Spatial Heterogeneity, Indirect Interactions, and the Coexistence of Prey Species

Predation may generate patterns in the structure of communities similar to those produced by competition. The potential role of spatial heterogeneity in promoting the coexistence of prey species is explored with both analytical and graphical models. In these models, prey interact indirectly through their effect on predator numbers: an interaction that leads to "apparent competition" and a problem in species coexistence. A model of prey coexistence in a homogeneous habitat is explored. If prey grow logistically, prey abundance is measured by the effect prey have on predator growth, and the predator consumes prey in a finegrained manner, the criterion for species k to remain in the community takes a simple form: its sensitivity to predation (ak/rk) cannot exceed the average sensitivity to predation of the entire community, ($$\overline {a/r}$$), divided by a measure of the intensity of predation on the community (Δ). At high Δ, species must have very similar values for ai/ri to coexist. This suggests that in spatially homogeneous environments, prey coexistence is difficult to achieve at high intensities of predation. There are two distinct ways in which spatial segregation may promote prey coexistence. First, habitat selection by the predator may provide each prey with an implicit refuge in the presence of the alternative prey, because predators will tend to leave a habitat in which their foraging yields are relatively low. If predators can select their habitats optimally without cost, and without interference from other predators, it is shown that at equilibrium no prey suffers a reduction in density because other prey are present in the diet. Nonoptimal habitat selection or interference between predators makes prey that have either low intrinsic growth rates (ri) or high rates of predator attack (ai) vulnerable to density reductions or extinction, as a result of predator "spillover" between patches. Second, if prey are spatially segregated, the predator population may be broken into two, partially independent subpopulations coupled by random predator movement. If each prey grows exponentially in the absence of predation, the permissible difference in their sensitivities to predation (ai/ri) is bounded by a measure of spatial coupling; the more tightly the two patches are linked by predator movement, the more similar the values for ai/ri must be if the prey are to continue to coexist. This model also provides a simple illustration of how spatial heterogeneity may stabilize an otherwise unstable predator-prey system. The evolutionary stability of segregation between prey is briefly discussed. Even if habitat partitioning relaxes apparent competition between prey occupying separate patches, the segregational pattern itself may persist because of apparent competition within each patch. Several examples from field studies suggest that habitat partitioning and the movement behavior of both predators and prey are important factors affecting coexistence in prey communities.

[1]  J. C. Munger,et al.  Competition in desert rodents: an experiment with semipermeable exclosures. , 1981, Science.

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

[3]  P. Abrams Consumer functional response and competition in consumer-resource systems. , 1980, Theoretical population biology.

[4]  S. Louda,et al.  Biotic Interference with Insects Imported for Weed Control , 1976 .

[5]  Donald R. Strong,et al.  Natural Variability and the Manifold Mechanisms of Ecological Communities , 1983, The American Naturalist.

[6]  A. Hastings Global stability in Lotka-Volterra systems with diffusion , 1978 .

[7]  J. Monro,et al.  The Exploitation and Conservation of Resources by Populations of Insects , 1967 .

[8]  W. Murdoch Switching in General Predators: Experiments on Predator Specificity and Stability of Prey Populations , 1969 .

[9]  H. I. Freedman,et al.  Mathematical Models of Population Interactions with Dispersal. I: Stability of Two Habitats with and without a Predator , 1977 .

[10]  R. Macarthur,et al.  Graphical Representation and Stability Conditions of Predator-Prey Interactions , 1963, The American Naturalist.

[11]  Colin W. Clark,et al.  Mathematical Bioeconomics: The Optimal Management of Renewable Resources. , 1993 .

[12]  L. Segel,et al.  Models of the influence of predation on aspect diversity in prey populations , 1982, Journal of mathematical biology.

[13]  R. Ricklefs,et al.  ASPECT DIVERSITY IN MOTHS: A TEMPERATE‐TROPICAL COMPARISON , 1975, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[14]  J. Vandermeer On the regional stabilization of locally unstable predator-prey relationships. , 1973, Journal of theoretical biology.

[15]  A. P. Dodd The biological campaign against prickly-pear , 1940 .

[16]  Sze-Bi Hsu,et al.  Two predators competing for two prey species: An analysis of MacArthur's model , 1979 .

[17]  R. May,et al.  Stability and Complexity in Model Ecosystems , 1976, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[18]  R. Ricklefs,et al.  Competition and the structure of bird communities. , 1975, Monographs in population biology.

[19]  ALAN ROBERTS,et al.  The stability of a feasible random ecosystem , 1974, Nature.

[20]  D. Janzen Herbivores and the Number of Tree Species in Tropical Forests , 1970, The American Naturalist.

[21]  M. Hassell,et al.  Resource Competition and Community Structure , 1984 .

[22]  A Hastings,et al.  Spatial heterogeneity and the stability of predator-prey systems: predator-mediated coexistence. , 1978, Theoretical population biology.

[23]  W. Schaffer ECOLOGICAL ABSTRACTION: THE CONSEQUENCES OF REDUCED DIMENSIONALITY IN ECOLOGICAL MODELS' , 1981 .

[24]  J. Endler A Predator’s View of Animal Color Patterns , 1978 .

[25]  Montgomery Slatkin,et al.  On the Equilibration of Fitnesses by Natural Selection , 1978, The American Naturalist.

[26]  R. Paine Food Web Complexity and Species Diversity , 1966, The American Naturalist.

[27]  W. Murdoch,et al.  Predation and Population Stability , 1975 .

[28]  K. Kawasaki,et al.  Spatial pattern formation of prey-predator populations , 1979 .

[29]  M. Rosenzweig,et al.  A Theory of Habitat Selection , 1981 .

[30]  P. Crowley Predator-mediated coexistence: an equilibrium interpretation. , 1979, Journal of theoretical biology.

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

[32]  W. Murdoch Stabilizing effects of spatial heterogeneity in predator-prey systems. , 1977, Theoretical population biology.

[33]  P. Abrams Density-Independent Mortality and Interspecific Competition: A Test of Pianka's Niche Overlap Hypothesis , 1977, The American Naturalist.

[34]  Michael E. Gilpin,et al.  Spiral Chaos in a Predator-Prey Model , 1979, The American Naturalist.

[35]  Joseph H. Connell,et al.  On the Prevalence and Relative Importance of Interspecific Competition: Evidence from Field Experiments , 1983, The American Naturalist.

[36]  R. B. Root,et al.  Insect Herbivores Limit Habitat Distribution of a Native Composite, Machaeranthera Canescens , 1981 .

[37]  R. McMurtrie Persistence and stability of single-species and prey-predator systems in spatially heterogeneous environments , 1978 .

[38]  T. Macan THE INFLUENCE OF PREDATION ON THE COMPOSITION OF FRESH‐WATER ANIMAL COMMUNITIES , 1977, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

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

[40]  A. Sih STABILITY AND PREY BEHAVIOURAL RESPONSES TO PREDATOR DENSITY , 1979 .

[41]  A. Winfree The geometry of biological time , 1991 .

[42]  R. G. Casten,et al.  Global Stability and Multiple Domains of Attraction in Ecological Systems , 1979, The American Naturalist.

[43]  M. Hay Herbivory, Algal Distribution, and the Maintenance of Between-Habitat Diversity on a Tropical Fringing Reef , 1981, The American Naturalist.

[44]  S. Fretwell Populations in a seasonal environment. , 1973, Monographs in population biology.

[45]  Marcus W. Feldman,et al.  Species Packing and Predation Pressure , 1975 .

[46]  John W. Glasser The Role of Predation in Shaping and Maintaining the Structure of Communities , 1979, The American Naturalist.

[47]  L. Slobodkin Growth and regulation of animal populations , 1962 .

[48]  S. Jørgensen Models in Ecology , 1975 .

[49]  T. Schoener The compression hypothesis and temporal resource partitioning. , 1974, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[50]  B P Zeigler,et al.  Persistence and patchiness of predator-prey systems induced by discrete event population exchange mechanisms. , 1977, Journal of theoretical biology.

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

[52]  W. C. Chewning Migratory effects in predator-prey models , 1975 .

[53]  Robert M. May,et al.  HOST-PARASITOID SYSTEMS IN PATCHY ENVIRONMENTS: A PHENOMENOLOGICAL MODEL , 1978 .

[54]  J. Diamond Niche Shifts and the Rediscovery of Interspecific Competition , 1978 .

[55]  Thomas W. Schoener,et al.  Field Experiments on Interspecific Competition , 1983, The American Naturalist.

[56]  R. May,et al.  Aggregation of Predators and Insect Parasites and its Effect on Stability , 1974 .

[57]  Burt P. Kotler Risk of predation and the structure of desert rodent communities , 1984 .

[58]  Hal Caswell,et al.  Predator-Mediated Coexistence: A Nonequilibrium Model , 1978, The American Naturalist.

[59]  A Hastings,et al.  Spatial heterogeneity and the stability of predator-prey systems. , 1977, Theoretical population biology.

[60]  R. Vance,et al.  Predation and Resource Partitioning in One Predator -- Two Prey Model Communities , 1978, The American Naturalist.

[61]  T. Schoener The Controversy over Interspecific Competition , 1982 .

[62]  Thomas W. Schoener,et al.  Resource Partitioning in Ecological Communities , 1974, Science.

[63]  C. Jeffries Qualitative Stability and Digraphs in Model Ecosystems , 1974 .

[64]  M. Williamson An Elementary Theory of Interspecific Competition , 1957, Nature.

[65]  J. Lawton,et al.  Characteristics of successful natural enemies in models of biological control of insect pests , 1978, Nature.

[66]  M. Edmunds,et al.  Strategies of Prey. (Book Reviews: Defence in Animals. A Survey of Anti-Predator Defences) , 1974 .

[67]  R. May Predators that switch , 1977, Nature.

[68]  M. Hassell,et al.  The Dynamics of Optimally Foraging Predators and Parasitoids , 1979 .

[69]  Alan Hastings,et al.  Age-dependent predation is not a simple process. I. Continuous time models , 1983 .

[70]  J. Wiens,et al.  Perspectives in ornithology: Avian community ecology: an iconoclastic view , 1983 .

[71]  J. Lawton,et al.  Enemy free space and the structure of ecological communities , 1984 .

[72]  S. Louda Distribution Ecology: Variation in Plant Recruitment over a Gradient in Relation to Insect Seed Predation , 1982 .

[73]  T. Schoener Theory of Feeding Strategies , 1971 .

[74]  W. J. O'brien,et al.  The effect of Heterocope predation on zooplankton communities in arctic ponds1 , 1983 .

[75]  E. Charnov Optimal foraging, the marginal value theorem. , 1976, Theoretical population biology.

[76]  M. Hassell,et al.  Predation in multi-prey communities. , 1976, Journal of theoretical biology.

[77]  H. Comins,et al.  Prey-predator models in spatially heterogeneous environments. , 1974, Journal of theoretical biology.

[78]  R. Macarthur PATTERNS OF SPECIES DIVERSITY , 1965 .

[79]  M. Hassell Some consequences of habitat heterogeneity for population dynamics , 1980 .

[80]  J. Lawton,et al.  Community Patterns and Competition in Folivorous Insects , 1981, The American Naturalist.

[81]  R. Hilborn,et al.  The effect of spatial heterogeneity on the persistence of predator-prey interactions. , 1975, Theoretical population biology.

[82]  S. Levin Community Equilibria and Stability, and an Extension of the Competitive Exclusion Principle , 1970, The American Naturalist.

[83]  S. Gaines,et al.  A Unified Approach to Marine Plant-Herbivore Interactions. I. Populations and Communities , 1981 .

[84]  John W. Glasser Erratum: The Role of Predation in Shaping and Maintaining the Structure of Communities , 1979, The American Naturalist.

[85]  A. P. Dodd,et al.  The biological control of prickly pear in Australia. , 1959 .

[86]  C. Huffaker Experimental studies on predation : dispersion factors and predator-prey oscillations , 1958 .

[87]  B. Menge,et al.  Species Diversity Gradients: Synthesis of the Roles of Predation, Competition, and Temporal Heterogeneity , 1976, The American Naturalist.

[88]  Donald L. Flaherty,et al.  Ecosystem Trophic Complexity and Densities of the Willamette Mite, Eotetranychus Willamettei Ewing (Acarina: Tetranychidae) , 1969 .

[89]  R. Holt Predation, apparent competition, and the structure of prey communities. , 1977, Theoretical population biology.