Abstract
This article demonstrates how perceptual constraints of predators and the possibility that predators encounter prey both sequentially (one prey type at a time) and simultaneously (two or more prey types at a time) may influence the predator attack decisions, diet composition and functional response of a behavioural predator-prey system. Individuals of a predator species are assumed to forage optimally on two prey types and to have exact knowledge of prey population numbers (or densities) only in a neighbourhood of their actual spatial location. The system characteristics are inspected by means of a discrete-time, discrete-space, individual-based model of the one-predator-two-prey interaction. Model predictions are compared with ones that have been obtained by assuming only sequential encounters of predators with prey and/or omniscient predators aware of prey population densities in the whole environment. It is shown that the zero-one prey choice rule, optimal for sequential encounters and omniscient predators, shifts to abruptly changing partial preferences for both prey types in the case of omniscient predators faced with both types of prey encounters. The latter, in turn, become gradually changing partial preferences when predator omniscience is considered only local.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abrahams, M. V. (1986). Patch choice under perceptual constraints: A cause for departures from an ideal free distribution. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 19, 409–415.
Barkan, C. and M. Withiam (1989). Profitability, rate maximization, and reward delay: A test of the simultaneous-encounter model of prey choice with Parus atricapillus. Am. Nat. 134, 254–272.
Bélisle, C. and J. Cresswell (1997). The effects of a limited memory capacity on foraging behavior. Theor. Pop. Biol. 52, 78–90.
Berec, L. and V. Křivan A mechanistic model for partial preferences (accepted). Theor. Pop. Biol.
Charnov, E. L. (1976a). Optimal foraging: Attack strategy of a mantid. Am. Nat. 110, 141–151.
Charnov, E. L. (1976b). Optimal foraging, the marginal value theorem. Theor. Pop. Biol. 9, 129–136.
Davies, N. (1977). Prey selection and the search strategy of the spotted flycatcher (Muscicapa striata): A field study of optimal foraging. Anim. Behav. 25, 1016–1033.
de Roos, A. M., E. McCauley and W. G. Wilson (1991). Mobility versus density-limited predator-prey dynamics on different scales. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 246, 117–122.
Engen, S. and N. C. Stenseth (1984a). An ecological paradox: A food type may become more rare in the diet as a consequence of being more abundant. Am. Nat. 124, 352–359.
Engen, S. and N. C. Stenseth (1984b). A general version of optimal foraging theory: The effect of simultaneous encounters. Theor. Pop. Biol. 26, 192–204.
Fryxell, J. M. and P. Lundberg (1994). Diet choice and predator-prey dynamics. Evol. Ecol. 8, 407–421.
Gleeson, S. K. and D. S. Wilson (1986). Equilibrium diet: Optimal foraging and prey coexistence. Oikos 46, 139–144.
Gray, R. and M. Kennedy (1994). Perceptual constraints on optimal foraging: A reason for departures from the ideal free distribution? Anim. Behav. 47, 469–471.
Hirvonen, H., E. Ranta, H. Rita and N. Peuhkuri (1999). Significance of memory properties in prey choice decisions. Ecol. Model. 115, 177–189.
Houston, A., J. Krebs and J. Erichsen (1980). Optimal prey choice and discrimination time in the great tit (Parus major L.). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 6, 169–175.
Hughes, R. (1979). Optimal diets under the energy maximization premise: The effects of recognition time and learning. Am. Nat. 113, 209–221.
Krebs, J. R., J. T. Erichsen, M. I. Webber and E. L. Charnov (1977). Optimal prey selection in the great tit (Parus major). Anim. Behav. 25, 30–38.
Křivan, V. (1996). Optimal foraging and predator-prey dynamics. Theor. Pop. Biol. 49, 265–290.
Křivan, V. and A. Sikder (1999). Optimal foraging and predator-prey dynamics, II. Theor. Popul. Biol. 55, 111–126.
MacArthur, R. H. and E. R. Pianka (1966). On optimal use of a patchy environment. Am. Nat. 100, 603–609.
Mangel, M. and B. Roitberg (1989). Dynamic information and host acceptance by a tephritid fruit fly. Ecol. Entomol. 14, 181–189.
McCauley, E., W. G. Wilson and A. M. de Roos (1993). Dynamics of age-structured and spatially structured predator-prey interactions: Individual-based models and population-level formulations. Am. Nat. 142, 412–442.
McNamara, J. M. and A. I. Houston (1987). Partial preferences and foraging. Anim. Behav. 35, 1084–1099.
Mitchell, W. (1989). Informational constraints on optimally foraging hummingbirds. Oikos 55, 145–154.
Mittelbach, G. (1981). Foraging efficiency and body size: a study of optimal diet and habitat use by bluegills. Ecology 62, 1370–1386.
Murdoch, W. W., E. McCauley, R. M. Nisbet, W. S. C. Gurney and A. M. de Roos (1992). Individual-based models: combining testability and generality, in Individual-Based Models and Approaches in Ecology—Populations, Communities and Ecosystems, D. L. De Angelis and L. J. Gross (Eds), New York: Chapman & Hall, pp. 18–35.
Pulliam, H. R. (1974). On the theory of optimal diets. Am. Nat. 108, 57–74.
Pulliam, H. R. (1975). Diet optimization with nutrient constraints. Am. Nat. 109, 765–768.
Rechten, C., M. Avery and A. Stevens (1983). Optimal prey selection: Why do great tits show partial preferences? Anim. Behav. 31, 576–584.
Rice, W. R. (1983). Sensory modality: An example of its effect on optimal foraging behavior. Ecology 64, 403–406.
Schmidt, K. (1998). The consequences of partially directed search effort. Evol. Ecol. 12, 263–277.
Schmitz, O. J. (1997). Commemorating 30 years of optimal foraging theory. Evol. Ecol. 11, 631–632.
Schoener, T. W. (1971). Theory of feeding strategies. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 11, 369–404.
Spencer, H. G., M. Kennedy and R. D. Gray (1996). Perceptual constraints on optimal foraging: The effects of variation among foragers. Evol. Ecol. 10, 331–339.
Stephens, D. W. and J. R. Krebs (1986). Foraging Theory, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Stephens, D. W., J. F. Lynch, A. E. Sorensen and C. Gordon (1986). Preference and profitability: Theory and experiment. Am. Nat. 127, 533–553.
Stillman, R. A., J. D. Goss-Custard and R. W. G. Caldow (1997). Modelling interference from basic foraging behaviour. J. Anim. Ecol. 66, 692–703.
Waddington, K. and L. Holden (1979). Optimal foraging: On flower selection by bees. Am. Nat. 114, 179–196.
Werner, E. E. and D. J. Hall (1974). Optimal foraging and the size selection of prey by the bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus). Ecology 55, 1042–1052.
Wilson, W. G. (1998). Resolving discrepancies between deterministic population models and individual-based simulations. Am. Nat. 151, 116–134.
Wilson, W. G., A. M. de Roos and E. McCauley (1993). Spatial instabilities within the diffusive Lotka-Volterra system: Individual-based simulation results. Theor. Popul. Biol. 43, 91–127.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Berec, L. Mixed encounters, limited perception and optimal foraging. Bull. Math. Biol. 62, 849–868 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1006/bulm.2000.0179
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/bulm.2000.0179