Oecologia

, Volume 91, Issue 2, pp 179–183 | Cite as

Effects of zooplankton availability and foraging mode on cannibalism in three dragonfly larvae

  • Frank Johansson
Original Papers

Summary

Cannibalism is likely to operate as a form of population control in dragonfly larvae. I performed aquarium experiments to investigate the effect of foraging activity and zooplankton availability on cannibalism in three dragonfly larvae. Large Cordulia aenea larvae showed low activity, and large Leucorrhinia dubia larvae showed high activity irrespective of zooplankton availability. In contrast, large Coenagrion hastulatum larvae changed from high activity in the absence to low activity in the presence of zooplankton. Small Cordulia aenea larvae were active in the absence of large conspecifics irrespective of zooplankton availability. In the presence of large conspecifics they showed a reduced activity when zooplankton were present. Small L. dubia larvae showed high activity and small Coenagrion hastulatum larvae low activity irrespective of pressence or absence of zooplankton and large conspecifics. In all three species cannibalism was highest in the absence of zooplankton. In the absence of zooplankton cannibalism was low in Coenagrion hastulatum compared to the other two species. On the contrary, in the presence of zooplankton, cannibalism did not differ between the three species.

Key words

Cannibalism Odonate larvae Foraging mode Zooplankton availability 

References

  1. Abrams PA (1984) Foraging time optimization and interactions in food webs. Am Nat 124: 80–96Google Scholar
  2. Baker RL, Clifford HF (1981) Life cycles and food of Coenagrion resolutum (Coenagrionidae: Odonata) and Lestes disjunctus (Lestidae: Odonata) populations from the boreal forest of Alberta, Canada. Aquat Insects 3: 179–191Google Scholar
  3. Benke AC (1978) Interactions among coexisting predators—A field experiment with dragonfly larvae. J Anim Ecol 47: 335–350Google Scholar
  4. Benke AC, Benke SS (1975) Comparative dynamics and life histories of coexisting dragonfly populations. Ecology 56: 302–317Google Scholar
  5. Benke AC, Crowley PH, Johnson DM (1982) Interactions among coexisting larval Odonata: an in situ experiment using small enclosures. Hydrobiologia 94: 121–130Google Scholar
  6. Crowley PH, Dillon PM, Johnson DM, Watson CN (1987) Intraspecific interference among larvae in a semivoltine dragonfly population. Oecologia 71: 447–456Google Scholar
  7. Fischer Z (1960) Cannibalism among the larvae of the dragonfly Lestes nympha Selys. Ekol Pol, Series B 7: 33–39.Google Scholar
  8. Formanowicz DR Jr (1982) Foraging tactics of larvae of Dytiscus verticalis (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae): the assessment of prey density. J Anim Ecol 51: 757–767Google Scholar
  9. Gabriel W (1985) Overcoming food limitation by cannibalism: A model study on cyclopoids. Arch Hydrobiol Beih 21: 373–381Google Scholar
  10. Hassell MP (1978) The dynamics of arthropod predator-prey systems. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  11. Holling CS (1966) The functional response of invertebrate predators to prey density. Mem Entomol Soc Can 48: 1–86Google Scholar
  12. Holm S (1979) A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scand J Statist 6: 65–70Google Scholar
  13. Johansson F (1991) Foraging modes in an assemblage of odonate larvae-effects of prey and interference. Hydrobiologia 209: 79–87Google Scholar
  14. Johansson F (1992) Intra guild predation and cannibalism in odonate larvae: effects of foraging behaviour and zooplankton availability. Oikos (in press)Google Scholar
  15. Johnson DM (1986) The life history of Tetragoneuria cynosura (Say) in Bays Mountain Lake, Tennessee, United States (Anisoptera. Corduliidae). Odonatologica 15: 81–90Google Scholar
  16. Johnson DM, Pierce CL, Martin TH, Watson CN, Bohanan RE, Crowley PH (1987) Prey depletion by odonate larvae: combining evidence from multiple field experiments. Ecology 68: 1459–1465Google Scholar
  17. Johnson DM, Crowley PH, Bohanan RE, Watson CN, Martin TH (1985) Competition among dragonflies: a field enclosure experiment. Ecology 66: 119–128Google Scholar
  18. Landahl HD, Hansen BD (1975) A three stage population model with cannibalism. Bull Math Biol 37: 11–17Google Scholar
  19. Ludwig D, Rowe L (1990) Life history strategies for energy gain and predator avoidance under time constraints. Am Nat 135: 686–707Google Scholar
  20. Macan TT (1974) Twenty generations of Pyrrhosoma nymphula (Sulzer) and Enallaqma cyathigerum Charpienter (Zygoptera: Coenagrionidae). Odonatologica 3: 107–119Google Scholar
  21. Merrill RJ, Johnson DM (1984) Dietary niche overlap and mutual predation among coexisting larval Anisoptera. Odonatologica 13: 387–406Google Scholar
  22. Polis GA (1980) The effect of cannibalism on the demography and activity of a natural population of desert scorpions. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 7: 25–35Google Scholar
  23. Polis GA (1981) The evolution and dynamics of intraspecific predation. Annu Rey Ecol Syst 12: 225–251Google Scholar
  24. Pritchard G (1964) The prey of dragonfly larvae (Odonata; Anisoptera) in ponds in Northern Alberta. Can J Zool 42: 785–800Google Scholar
  25. Robinson JV, Wellborn GA (1987) Mutual predation in assembled communities of odonate species. Ecology 68: 912–927Google Scholar
  26. Sih A (1982) Foraging strategies and the avoidance of predation by an aquatic insect, Notonecta hoffmanni. Ecology 63: 786–796Google Scholar
  27. Sih A (1984) Optimal behaviour and density-dependent predation. Am Nat 123: 314–326Google Scholar
  28. Thompson DJ (1978) The natural prey of the damselfly, Ischnura elegans (Odonata: Zygoptera). Freshw Biol 8: 377–384Google Scholar
  29. Van Buskirk J (1989) Density dependent cannibalism in larval dragonflies. Ecology 70: 1442–1449Google Scholar
  30. Wilkinson L (1988) SYSTAT: the system for statistics. Systat, Evanston, IllGoogle Scholar
  31. Wissinger SA (1988a) Spatial distribution, life history and estimates of survivorship in a fourteen-species assemblage of larval dragonflies (Odonata: Anisoptera). Freshw Biol 20: 329–340Google Scholar
  32. Wissinger SA (1988b) Life history and size structure of larval dragonfly populations. JN Am Benthol Soc 7: 13–28Google Scholar
  33. Wissinger SA (1989) Seasonal variation in the intensity of competition and predation among dragonfly larvae. Ecology 70: 1017–1027Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frank Johansson
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Animal EcologyUniversity of UmeåUmeåSweden

Personalised recommendations