Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 60, Issue 1, pp 1–10 | Cite as

Optimal patch time allocation for time-limited foragers

  • Eric WajnbergEmail author
  • Pierre Bernhard
  • Frédéric Hamelin
  • Guy Boivin
Original Article


The Charnov Marginal Value Theorem (MVT) predicts the optimal foraging duration of animals exploiting patches of resources. The predictions of this model have been verified for various animal species. However, the model is based on several assumptions that are likely too simplistic. One of these assumptions is that animals are living forever (i.e., infinite horizon). Using a simple dynamic programming model, we tested the importance of this assumption by analysing the optimal strategy for time-limited foragers. We found that, for time-limited foragers, optimal patch residence times should be greater than those predicted from the classic, static MVT, and the deviation should increase when foragers are approaching the end of their life. These predictions were verified for females of the parasitoid Anaphes victus (Hymenoptera: Mymaridae) exploiting egg patches of its host, the carrot weevil Listronotus oregonensis (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). As predicted by the model, females indeed remained for a longer time on host patches when they approached the end of their life. Experimental results were finally analysed with a Cox regression model to identify the patch-leaving decision rules females used to behave according to the model’s predictions.


Marginal Value Theorem Time-limited foragers Dynamic programming model Anaphes victus Cox regression model 



This work was supported in part by research grants from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) to G. Boivin. J. Vaillancourt is thanked for her technical assistance. T.S. Hoffmeister, R.H. Messing, E. Mondor, P. Nonacs, J.S. Pierre and B.D. Roitberg are thanked for their comments on an earlier version of the manuscript. This work is part of GDR 2155 ‘Ecologie Comportementale’ [Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) commission 29] and the European Science Foundation (ESF)/Behavioural Ecology of Insect Parasitoids (BEPAR) scientific programme. All the experimental procedures conformed to French and Canadian law.


  1. Bernstein C, Kacelnik A, Krebs JR (1988) Individual decisions and the distribution of predators in a patchy environment. J Anim Ecol 57:1007–1026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bernstein C, Kacelnik A, Krebs JR (1991) Individual decisions and the distribution of predators in a patchy environment. II. The influence of travel costs and structure of the environment. J Anim Ecol 60:205–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boivin G (1988) Laboratory rearing of Anaphes sordidatus (Girault) (Hymenoptera: Mymaridae) on carrot weevil eggs (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Entomophaga 33:131–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boivin G (1999) Integrated management for carrot weevil. Integr Pest Manag Rev 4:21–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boivin G, van Baaren J (2000) The role of larval aggression and mobility in the transition between solitary and gregarious development in parasitoid wasps. Ecol Lett 3:469–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boivin G, Fauvergue X, Wajnberg E (2004) Optimal patch residence time in egg parasitoids: innate versus learned estimate of patch quality. Oecologia 138:640–647PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bonser B, Wright PJ, Bament S, Chukwu UO (1998) Optimal patch use by foraging workers of Lasius fuliginosus, L. niger and Myrmica ruginodis. Ecol Entomol 23:15–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown JS (1988) Patch use as an indicator of habitat preference, predation risk, and competition. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 22:37–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bulmer M (1994) Theoretical evolutionary ecology. Sinauer Associates, Inc., SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  10. Charnov EL (1976) Optimal foraging: the marginal value theorem. Theor Popul Biol 9:129–136PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clark CW, Mangel M (2000) Dynamic state variable models in ecology. Methods and applications. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Collett D (1994) Modelling survival data in medical research. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. Cook RM, Hubbard SF (1977) Adaptive searching strategies in insect parasites. J Anim Ecol 46:115–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cox DR (1972) Regression models and life tables. J R Stat Soc B 74:187–220Google Scholar
  15. Cox DR (1975) Partial likelihood. Biometrika 62:269–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Driessen G, Bernstein C (1999) Patch departure mechanisms and optimal host exploitation in an insect parasitoid. J Anim Ecol 68:445–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Driessen G, Bernstein C, van Alphen JJM, Kacelnik A (1995) A count-down mechanism for host search in the parasitoid Venturia canescens. J Anim Ecol 64:117–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fletcher JP, Hughes JP, Harvey IF (1994) Life expectancy and egg load affect oviposition decisions of a solitary parasitoid. Proc R Soc Lond 258:163–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Giraldeau LA (1997) The ecology of information use. In: Krebs JR, Davies NB (eds) Behavioural ecology, 4th edn. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 42–68Google Scholar
  20. Gladstein DS, Carlin NF, Austad SN (1991) The need for sensitivity analyses of dynamic optimization models. Oikos 60:121–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Godfray HCJ (1994) Parasitoids. Behavioral and evolutionary ecology. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  22. Green RF (1980) Bayesian birds: a simple example of Oaten’s stochastic model of optimal foraging. Theor Popul Biol 18:244–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Green RF (1984) Stopping rules for optimal foragers. Am Nat 123:30–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Haccou P, de Vlas SJ, van Alphen JJM, Visser ME (1991) Information processing by foragers: effects of intra-patch experience on the leaving tendency of Leptopilina heterotoma. J Anim Ecol 60:93–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Haccou P, Sjerps M, van der Meijden E (1999) To leave or to stay, that is the question: prediction from models of patch-leaving strategies. In: Olff H, Brown VK, Drent RH (eds) Herbivores: between plants and predators. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 85–108Google Scholar
  26. Hassell MP (1978) The dynamics of arthropod predator–prey systems. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  27. Henneman ML (1998) Maximization of host encounters by parasitoids foraging in the field: females can use a simple rule. Oecologia 116:467–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Holling CS (1959) Some characteristics of simple types of predation and parasitism. Can Entomol 91:385–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Houston AI (1987) The control of foraging decisions. In: Commons ML, Kacelnik A, Shettleworth SJ (eds) Quantitative analysis of behavior, vol IV. Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 41–61Google Scholar
  30. Houston AI, Clark CW, McNamara JM, Mangel M (1988) Dynamic models in behavioral and evolutionary ecology. Nature 332:29–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Houston AI, Welton NJ, McNamara JM (1997) Acquisition and maintenance costs in the long-term regulation of avian fat reserves. Oikos 78:331–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hubbard SF, Cook RM (1978) Optimal foraging by parasitoid wasps. J Anim Ecol 47:593–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hutchinson JMC, McNamara JM (2000) Ways to test stochastic dynamic programming models empirically. Anim Behav 59:665–676PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Iwasa Y, Higashi M, Yamamura N (1981) Prey distribution as a factor determining the choice of optimal foraging strategy. Am Nat 117:710–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Keasar T, Ney-Nifle M, Mangel M, Swezey S (2001) Early oviposition experience affects patch residence time in a foraging parasitoid. Entomol Exp Appl 98:123–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Krebs JR, Kacelnik A, Taylor P (1978) Test of optimal sampling by foraging great tits. Nature 275:27–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Li C, Roitberg BD, Mackauer M (1993) Patch residence time and parasitism of Aphelinus asychis: a simulation model. Ecol Model 69:227–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mangel M (1993) Motivation, learning, and motivated learning. In: Papaj DR, Lewis AC (eds) Insect learning. Ecological and evolutionary perspectives. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 158–173Google Scholar
  39. Maynard Smith J (1982) Evolution and the theory of games. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  40. McNair JM (1982) Optimal giving-up time and the marginal value theorem. Am Nat 119:511–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McNamara JM (1982) Optimal patch use in a stochastic environment. Theor Popul Biol 21:269–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. McNamara JM, Houston AI (1985) Optimal foraging and learning. J Theor Biol 117:231–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. McNamara JM, Houston AI (1986) The common currency for behavioural decisions. Am Nat 127:358–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McNamara JM, Houston AI (1987a) Memory and the efficient use of information. J Theor Biol 125:285–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. McNamara JM, Houston AI (1987b) Foraging in patches: there’s more to life than the Marginal Value Theorem. In: Commons ML, Kacelnik A, Shettleworth SJ (eds) Quantitative analysis of behavior, vol IV. Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 23–39Google Scholar
  46. Newman JA (1991) Patch use under predation hazard: foraging behavior in a simple stochastic environment. Oikos 61:29–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Nonacs P (2001) State dependent behavior and the Marginal Value Theorem. Behav Ecol 12:71–83Google Scholar
  48. Oaten A (1977) Optimal foraging in patches: a case for stochasticity. Theor Popul Biol 12:263–285PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ollason JG (1980) Learning to forage—optimally? Theor Popul Biol 18:44–56PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Olsson O, Holmgren NMA (1998) The survival-rate-maximizing policy for Bayesian foragers: wait for good news. Behav Ecol 9:345–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Picard C, Auclair JL, Boivin G (1991) Response to host age of the egg parasitoid Anaphes n.sp. (Hymenoptera: Mymaridae). Biocontrol Sci Technol 1:169–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Roitberg BD, Mangel M, Lalonde RG, Roitberg CA, van Alphen JJM, Vet L (1992) Seasonal dynamic shifts in patch exploitation by parasitic wasps. Behav Ecol 3:156–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Roitberg BD, Sircom J, Roitberg CA, van Alphen JJM, Mangel M (1993) Life expectancy and reproduction. Nature 364:108PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rosenheim JA, Mangel M (1994) Patch-leaving rules for parasitoids with imperfect host discrimination. Ecol Entomol 19:374–380Google Scholar
  55. Rosenheim JA, Rosen D (1991) Foraging and oviposition decisions in the parasitoid Aphytis lignanensis: distinguishing the influences of egg load and experience. J Anim Ecol 60:373–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sjerps M, Haccou P (1994) Effect of competition on optimal patch leaving: a war of attrition. Theor Popul Biol 46:300–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Stephens DW, Krebs JR (1986) Foraging theory. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  58. Tenhumberg B, Keller MA, Possingham HP (2001) Using Cox’s proportional hazards models to implement optimal strategies: an example from behavioural ecology. Math Comput Model 33:597–607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Thiel A, Hoffmeister TS (2004) Knowing your habitat: linking patch-encounter rate and patch exploitation in parasitoids. Behav Ecol 15:419–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. van Alphen JJM (1988) Patch-time allocation by insect parasitoids: superparasitism and aggregation. In: de Jong G (ed) Population genetics and evolution. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 216–221Google Scholar
  61. van Alphen JJM, Bernstein C, Driessen G (2003) Information acquisition and time allocation in insect parasitoids. Trends Ecol Evol 18:81–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. van Baaren J, Boivin G (1998a) Genotypic and kin discrimination in a solitary hymenopterous parasitoid: implications for speciation. Evol Ecol 12:523–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. van Baaren J, Boivin G (1998b) Learning affects host discrimination behavior in a parasitoid wasp. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 42:9–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. van Baaren J, Boivin G, Nénon JP (1994) Intra- and interspecific host discrimination in two closely related egg parasitoids. Oecologia 100:325–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Venables WN, Ripley BD (1994) Modern applied statistics with S-Plus. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  66. Visser ME, van Alphen JJM, Nell HW (1992) Adaptive superparasitism and patch time allocation in solitary parasitoids: the influence of pre-patch experience. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 31:163–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Waage JK (1979) Foraging for patchily-distributed hosts by the parasitoid, Nemeritis canescens. J Anim Ecol 48:353–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wajnberg E, Rosi MC, Colazza S (1999) Genetic variation in patch-time allocation in a parasitic wasp. J Anim Ecol 68:121–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Wajnberg E, Fauvergue X, Pons O (2000) Patch leaving decision rules and the Marginal Value Theorem: an experimental analysis and a simulation model. Behav Ecol 11:577–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Wajnberg E, Gonsard PA, Tabone E, Curty C, Lezcano N, Colazza S (2003) A comparative analysis of patch-leaving decision rules in a parasitoid family. J Anim Ecol 72:618–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wajnberg E, Curty C, Colazza S (2004) Genetic variation in the mechanisms of direct mutual interference in a parasitic wasp: consequences in terms of patch-time allocation. J Anim Ecol 73:1179–1189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Ward JF, Austin RM, MacDonald DW (2000) A simulation model of foraging behaviour and the effect of predation risk. J Anim Ecol 69:16–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Yamada Y (1988) Optimal use of patches by parasitoids with a limited fecundity. Res Popul Ecol 30:235–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Yamamura N, Tsuji N (1987) Optimal patch time under exploitative competition. Am Nat 129:553–567CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eric Wajnberg
    • 1
    Email author
  • Pierre Bernhard
    • 2
  • Frédéric Hamelin
    • 2
  • Guy Boivin
    • 3
  1. 1.InraSophia AntipolisFrance
  2. 2.UNSA/CNRS I3SEcole Polytechnique de Nice Sophia AntipolisSophia AntipolisFrance
  3. 3.Centre de Recherche et de Développement en HorticultureAgriculture et Agroalimentaire CanadaSaint-Jean-sur-RichelieuCanada

Personalised recommendations