1 / 167

Chapter 10 Predation

Chapter 10 Predation. © 2002 by Prentice Hall, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458. Outline. There are a variety of antipredator adaptations, which suggests that predation is important in nature Predator-prey models can explain many outcomes

tory
Download Presentation

Chapter 10 Predation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Chapter 10Predation © 2002 by Prentice Hall, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458

  2. Outline • There are a variety of antipredator adaptations, which suggests that predation is important in nature • Predator-prey models can explain many outcomes • Field data suggests that predators have a large impact on prey populations

  3. Outline • Experiments involving the removal or introduction of exotic predators provide good data on the effects of predators on their prey • Field experiments involving the manipulations of native populations show predation to be a strong force

  4. Equilibrium theories of population regulation • A.   Extrinsic biotic school • 1.   Food supply and population regulation • 2.   Predation and population regulation • 3.   Disease and population • B.   Intrinsic school • 1.   Stress and territoriality • 2.   Genetic polymorphism hypothesis • 3.   Dispersal

  5. The causes of population change key factor analysis 主導因子分析 (一) Density-dependent factor 密度制約因子: (種內、種間因素)作用強度隨種群密度而變。A factor affecting population size whose intensity of action varies with density. (二) )Density independent factor非密度制約因素 (外界環境因素): having an influence on individuals that does not vary with the number of individuals per unit area in the population.

  6. Density-dependent factor 密度制約因子:1. 種間因素 .食物、空間資源  種內、種間競爭 .病蟲害傳播速度 .個體成熟速度 .體質和繁殖力、生長發育、自相殘殺、外遷 .植物結實數量 .抗逆性 在橡樹蛾的生活史裡,有不同的生活環境,不同的掠食者,寄生、競爭、環境壓力,在不同時期裡會有不同的死亡率。

  7. 2.種間因素 .競爭 .掠食、寄生 .遺傳反饋機制(抗病種的培育) 澳洲野兔  粘液病毒  抗病種

  8. Density independent factor .氣候因素 .土壤因素 .營養 .理化 .空間 .汙染

  9. Extrinsic factors: External factors acting on populations . Predation, parasitism . Competition for food  density depended . Competition for space  density depended . Random stochastic change  density independent . Weather

  10. 1.種內因素 種群是一個具有自我調節 (self regulation)機制的生活系統,可以按照自身的性質及環境狀況調節它們的數量。 *植物的自疏現象 *禾本科植物的分的產生和生長 *遺傳特性(抗逆性) *內分泌調節(旅鼠) Crowding stress 腎上腺髓質(adrenocorticotropin) 腦下腺 (Epinephrine) 腎上腺皮質(Corticoids) 危急反應 Alarm response

  11. Introduction • Wolves in Yellowstone Park (Figure 10.1) • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1980’s • Reintroduce in Yellowstone Park and stabilize wolf populations in Minnesota and Montana • Concerns • Cattle ranchers concerned: Decimate herd? • Are predators tied to the health of the main prey? • Can predators switch prey? • Ramifications to reestablishment • Results: No major effects

  12. Introduction • Predation • Traditional view: carnivory • Differences from herbivory • Herbivory is non-lethal • Differences from parasitism • In parasitism, one individual is utilized for the development of more than one parasite

  13. High Intimacy Parasitoids Parasite Low Predator Grazer High Lethality Low Introduction • Predation (cont.) • Predator-prey associations • Figure 10.2

  14. Antipredator Adaptations • Aposematic or warning coloration • Advertises an unpalatable taste • Ex. Blue jays and monarch butterflies • Caterpillar obtains poison from milkweed

  15. Antipredator Adaptations • Ex. Blue jays and monarch butterflies (cont.) • Blue jays suffer violent vomiting from ingesting caterpillar • Ex. Tropical frogs • Toxic skin poisons • Figure 10.3a

  16. Antipredator Adaptations • Camouflage • Blending of organism into background color • Grasshoppers (Figure 10.3b)

  17. Antipredator Adaptations • Camouflage (cont.) • Stick insects mimic twigs and branches • Zebra stripes: blend into grassy background • Mimicry

  18. Antipredator Adaptations • Mimicry (cont.) • Animals that mimic other animals • Ex. Some hoverflies mimic wasps Mimicry • Types of mimicry • Müllerian mimicry • Fritz Müller, 1879 • Unpalatable species converge to look the same

  19. Antipredator Adaptations • Unpalatable species converge to look the same (cont.) • Reinforce basic distasteful design • Ex. Wasps and some butterflies • Mimicry ring: a group of sympatric species, often different taxa, share a common warning pattern • Batesian mimicry • Henry Bates, 1862 • Mimicry of unpalatable species by palatable species

  20. Antipredator Adaptations • Batesian mimicry (cont.) • Ex. hoverflies resemble stinging bees and wasps (Figure 10.3d)

  21. Antipredator Adaptations • Difficulty distinguishing type of mimicry • Monarch butterflies and viceroy butterflies (Figures 10.3d,e)

  22. Antipredator Adaptations • Displays of intimidation • Ex. Toads swallow air to make themselves appear larger • Ex. Frilled lizards extend their collars to produce the same effect (Figure 10.3f)

  23. Antipredator Adaptations • Polymorphism • Two or more discrete forms in the same population • Color polymorphism • Predator has a preference (usually the more abundant form) • Prey can proliferate in the rarer form

  24. Antipredator Adaptations • Color polymorphism (cont.) • Ex. leafhopper nymphs (orange and black) • Ex. Pea aphids (red and green) • Reflexive selection • Every individual is slightly different • Examples: brittle stars, butterflies, moths, echinoderms, and gastropods

  25. Antipredator Adaptations • Reflexive selection (cont.) • Thwart predators’ learning processes • Prey phenologically separated from predator • Ex. Fruit bats • Either diurnal or nocturnal • Only nocturnal in the presence of predatory diurnal eagles

  26. Antipredator Adaptations • Chemical defense • Used to ward off predators • Ex. bombardier beetles • Possess a reservoir of hydroquinone and hydrogen perioxide • When threatened, eject chemicals into “explosion chamber”

  27. Antipredator Adaptations • Ex. bombardier beetles (cont.) • Mix with peroxidase enzyme • Mixture is violently sprayed at attacker • Masting • Synchronous production of many progeny by all individuals in population

  28. Antipredator Adaptations • Masting (cont.) • Satiate predators • Allows for some progeny to survive • Common to seed herbivory • Ex. 17-year and 13-year periodical cicadas

  29. Antipredator Adaptations • Comparison of defense mechanisms • Table 10.1, chemical defense is most common

  30. Predator-Prey Models • Effects of predators on prey • Depend on such things as prey and predator densities, and predator efficiency • Graphical method to monitor relationship

  31. Predator-Prey Models • Graphical method to monitor relationship (cont.) • Prey isoclines have characteristic hump shape • Figure 10.4

  32. i) Prey iscoline N 2 Predator density Prey increase N K ii) Predator iscoline 1 1 N 2 K 2 Predator increases Predator decreases Predator density N Prey density 1

  33. Predator-Prey Models • Prey isoclines have characteristic hump shape (cont.) • In the absence of predators, prey density would be equal to the carrying capacity, K1 • Lower limit, individuals become too rare to meet for reproduction

  34. Predator-Prey Models • Prey isoclines have characteristic hump shape (cont.) • Between these two values, prey population can either increase or decrease depending on predator density • Above the isocline, prey populations decline

  35. Predator-Prey Models • Prey isoclines have characteristic hump shape (cont.) • Below the isocline, prey populations increase • Predator isoclines • Threshold density, where predator population will increase • Predator population can increase to carrying capacity

  36. Predator-Prey Models • Predator isoclines (cont.) • Mutual interference or competition between predators • More prey required for a given density predator • Predator isoclines slopes toward the right • Superimpose prey and predator isoclines • Figure 10.5

  37. Predator-Prey Models • Superimpose prey and predator isoclines (cont.) • One stable point emerges: the intersection of the lines • Three general cases • Inefficient predators require high densities of prey (Figure 10.5a)

  38. a) Damped oscillations Predator isocline Prey isocline

  39. Predator-Prey Models • Three general cases (cont.) • A moderately efficient predator leads to stable oscillations of predator and prey populations (Figure 10.5b)

  40. Stable oscillations b) Predator equilibrium density Population density

  41. Predator-Prey Models • Three general cases (cont.) • A highly efficient predator can exploit a prey nearly down to its limiting rareness (Figure 10.5c)

  42. c) Increasing oscillations Predator density

  43. Predator-Prey Models • All based on how efficient predator is • Shift in isoclines • Prey starvation (shift to left) • Food enrichment (shift to right) (Figure 10.5d)

  44. “The paradox of enrichment” d) K1 increases to K1* with enrichment Prey Prey isocline changes Predator isocline remains unchanged Predator K1 K1*

  45. Predator-Prey Models • Food enrichment (shift to right) (cont.) • Carrying capacity changes • Predator isocline changes – “paradox enrichment” : Increases in nutrients or food destabilizes the system

  46. Predator-Prey Models • Functional response • How an individual predator responds to prey density can affect how predators interact with prey (Figure 10.6)

  47. I Number of prey eaten per predator II III Prey density

  48. Predator-Prey Models • Functional response (cont.) • Three types • Type I: Individuals consume more prey as prey density increases • Type II: Predators can become satiated and stop feeding, or limited by handling time.

  49. Predator-Prey Models • Three types (cont.) • Type III: Feeding rate is similar to logistic curve; low at low prey densities, but increases quickly at high densities • Changes in prey consumption • Functional response changes (Figure 10.7)

More Related