Summary
The coexistence of competing species may be mediated by various mechanisms including resource partitioning and various kinds of environmental heterogeneity. In this paper we show how differences in life history enhance coexistence in stochastic environments. In Drosophila species, as in many other taxa, the developmental period is proportional to adult survival. A short developmental period, i.e. a high developmental rate, enhances the competitive ability of larvae. High adult survival, on the other hand, must increase the probability of reaching new breeding sites in space and time. We present a model of two competing species to investigate the consequences of the trade off. The model features density dependent mortality (due to competition) in the larval stage, and age dependent mortality in the adult stage. Breeding opportunities occur with a certain probability per time step. This is the only stochastic component of the model. The model demonstrates that fast growing, short lived species are superior when breeding opportunities are frequent. Slower growing, long lived species are superior when breeding opportunities are rare in time. A sensitivity analysis indicates that this conclusion is qualitatively robust. The mutual invasibility criterion reveals that stable coexistence will occur for certain feeding probabilities.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Ashburner, M. and J.N. Thompson Jr. 1978. The laboratory culture of Drosophila. In M. Ash-burner and T.R.F. Wright (Eds.) The Genetics and Biology of Drosophila 2a. Academic Press, London, pp. 1–109.
Atkinson, W.D. 1979. A comparison of the reproductive strategies of domestic species of Drosophila. J. Anim. Ecol. 48: 53–64.
Atkinson, W.D. and B. Shorrocks. 1981. Competition on a divided and ephemeral resource: a simulation model. J. Anim. Ecol. 50: 461–471.
Bakker, K. 1961. An analysis of factors which determine success in competition for food among larvae of Drosophila melanogaster. Arch. Neerl. Zool. 14: 200–281.
Bakker, K. 1969. Selection for rate of growth and its influence on competitive ability of larvae of Drosophila melanogaster. Neth. J. Zool. 19: 541–595.
Begon, M. and R. Wall. 1987. Individual variation and competitor coexistence: a model. Fund. Ecol. 1: 237–241.
Bellows, T.S. 1981. The descriptive properties of some models for density dependence. J. Anim. Ecol. 50: 139–156.
Charnov, E.L. and D. Berrigan. 1990. Dimensionless numbers and life history evolution: age of maturity versus adult life span. Evol. Ecol. 4: 273–275.
Chesson, P.L. 1985a. Coexistence of competitors in spatially and temporally varying environments: a look at the combined effects of different sorts of variability. Theor. Popul. Biol. 28: 263–287.
Chesson, P.L. 1985b. Environmental variation and the coexistence of species. In J. Diamond and T.J. Case (Eds.) Community Ecology. Harper and Row, New York. pp. 240–256.
Chesson, P. and N. Huntly. 1988. Community consequences of life history traits in a variable environment. Ann. Zool. Fennici 25: 5–16.
Chesson, P. and N. Huntly. 1989. Short term instabilities and long term community dynamics. Trends Ecol. and Evol. 4: 293–298.
Chesson, P. and M. Rosenzweig. 1991. Behavior, heterogeneity, and the dynamics of interacting species. Ecology 72: 1187–1195.
Comins, N.R. and I.R. Noble. 1985. Dispersal, variability, and transient niches: species coexistence in a uniformly variable environment. Amer. Nat. 126: 706–723.
De Jong, G. 1976. A model of competition for food. 1. Frequency-dependent viabilities. Amer. Nat. 110: 1013–1027.
Foster, R.B. 1982. The seasonal rhythm of fruitfall on Barro Colorado Island. In E.G. Leigh, A.S. Rand and D.M. Windsor (Eds.) The Ecology of a Tropical Forest. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, pp. 151–172.
Gilpin, M.E., M.P. Carpenter and M.J. Pomerantz. 1986. The assembly of a laboratory community: multispecies competition in Drosophila. In J. Diamond and T.J. Case (Eds.) Community Ecology. Harper and Row, New York. pp. 23–40.
Hanski, I. 1981. Coexistence of competitors in patchy environment with and without prédation. Oikos 37: 306–312.
Hardin, G. 1960. The competitive exclusion principle. Science 131: 1292–1297.
Harvey, P.H., M.D. Pagel and J.A. Rees. 1991. Mammalian metabolism and life histories. Amer. Nat. 137: 556–566.
Hoffmann, A.A. and P.A. Parsons. 1989. An integrated approach to environmental stress tolerance and life history variation: desiccation tolerance in Drosophila. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 37: 117–136.
Ives, A.R. 1988. Covariance, coexistence and the population dynamics of two competitors using a patchy resource. J. Theor. Biol. 133: 345–361.
Ives, A.R. and R.M. May. 1985. Competition within and between species in a patchy environment: relations between microscopic and macroscopic models. J. Theor. Biol. 115: 65–92.
Mac Arthur, R.H. 1972. Geographical Ecology. Harper and Row, New York.
Maynard Smith, J. and M. Slatkin. 1973. The stability of predator-prey systems. Ecology 54: 384–391.
Nunney, L. 1983. Sex differences in larval competition in Drosophila melanogaster: the testing of a competition model and its relevance to frequency-dependent selection. Amer. Nat. 121: 67–93.
Richter, O. and D. Söndgerath. 1990. Parameter Estimation in Ecology. VCH, Weinheim.
Rosewell, J. and B. Shorrocks. 1987. The implications of survival rates in natural populations of Drosophila: capture-recapture experiments on domestic species. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 32: 373–384.
Service, P.M. 1987. Physiological mechanisms of increased stress resistance in Drosophila melanogaster selected for postponed senescence. Physiol. Zool. 60: 321–326.
Sevenster, J.G. and J.J.M. van Alphen, in prep. A life history trade off in Drosophila species and community structure in variable environments.
Shorrocks, B., J. Rosewell, K. Edwards and W. Atkinson. 1984. Interspecific competition is not a major organizing force in many insect communities. Nature 310: 310–312.
Shorrocks, B. and J. Rosewell. 1986. Guild size in Drosophilids: a simulation model. J. Anim. Ecol. 55: 527–541.
Shorrocks, B. and J. Rosewell. 1987. Spatial patchiness and community structure: coexistence and guild size of Drosophilids on ephemeral resources. In J.H.R. Gee and P.S. Giller (Eds.) Organization of Communities Past and Present. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford. pp. 29–51.
Strong, D.R., D. Simberloff, L.G. Abele and A.B. Thistle (Eds). 1984. Ecological Communities: Conceptual issues and the Evidence.Princeton University, Princeton.
Treveleyan, R., P.H. Harvey and M.D. Pagel. 1990. Metabolic rates and life histories in birds. Fund. Ecol. 4: 135–141.
Yoshimura, J. and C.W. Clark. 1991. Individual adaptation in stochastic environments. Evol. Ecol. 5: 173–192.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1993 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Sevenster, J.G., van Alphen, J.J.M. (1993). Coexistence in Stochastic Environments through a Life History Trade Off in Drosophila. In: Yoshimura, J., Clark, C.W. (eds) Adaptation in Stochastic Environments. Lecture Notes in Biomathematics, vol 98. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-51483-8_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-51483-8_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-56681-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-51483-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive