Advertisement

Polar Biology

, Volume 42, Issue 1, pp 99–113 | Cite as

Variation of interspecific interactions at different ecological levels within an assemblage of Arctic marine predators

  • Edwige BellierEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

How interspecific interactions change across scales is poorly known. Such knowledge might help us understand how species interact within communities and highlight scale-dependent ecological processes in play among species. Here, I propose to analyze the inter-annual variation of a species assemblage at different ecological levels. For this, I joined a two-stage modeling approach and a spatially explicit multivariate model to analyze the interspecies relationships among six species of pelagic seabirds from 2004 to 2015 in the Barents Sea. The large-scale (~400 km) pattern of interactions revealed by the analyses suggests a change in the composition of the seabird community along the climatic gradient from south to north. At medium-scale (~300 km), the community was split into two areas (i.e., Arctic and sub-Arctic areas) suggesting niche differentiation of Arctic and sub-Arctic species driven by resource partitioning and interference competition. At a small-scale (~40 km), species with different body sizes were positively associated suggesting facilitation for accessing food although the species with the smallest body size was negatively associated with the species involved in the facilitation process suggesting interspecific interference competition. Over the years, the large-scale patterns were persistent, suggesting niche establishment, while small-scale patterns were highly variable suggesting only ephemeral interactions among species. My study demonstrates that interspecific relationships are scale-dependent and play major roles in structuring community. Untangling how species are associated with different ecological levels over time is indispensable to better understand how community structure contributes to ecological system dynamics.

Keywords

Barents Sea Facilitation Interspecific competition Large-scale structure Niche differentiation Residuals Scale-dependent Seabirds Annual variation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was funded by the Norwegian Research Council (WFR 185109). I am grateful of Per Fauchald to have provided data collected during the Norwegian/Russian ecosystem surveys, for his contribution to the study design and comments on earlier versions of the manuscript. I thank reviewer Courtney Admunson and two anonymous reviewers for comments that substantially ameliorate the manuscript. I thank the editor-in-chief for advice to perform the revision of the manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The author has no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

300_2018_2402_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (121 kb)
Electronic supplementary material 1 (PDF 121 kb)
300_2018_2402_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (17.7 mb)
Electronic supplementary material 2 (PDF 18154 kb)

References

  1. Balance LT, Pitman RL, Reilly SB (1997) Seabird community structure along a productivity gradient: importance of competition and energetic constraint. Ecology 78:1502–1518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barrett RT (2002) Atlantic puffin Fratercula arctica and Common guillemot Uria aalge chick diet and growth as indicators of fish stocks in the Barents Sea. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 230:275–287.  https://doi.org/10.3354/meps230275 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barrett RT, Asheim M, Bakken V (1997) Ecological relationships between two sympatric congeneric species, Common Murres and Thick-Billed Murres, Uria aalge and U-lomvia, breeding in the Barents Sea. Can J Zool 75:618–631.  https://doi.org/10.1139/z97-077 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barry SC, Welsh AH (2002) Generalized additive modelling and zero inflated count data. Ecol Modell 157:179–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bellier E, Monestiez P, Certain G, Chadoeuf J, Bretagnolle V (2012) Decomposing the heterogeneity of species distributions into multiple scales: a hierarchical framework for large-count surveys. Ecography 35:839–854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bellier E, Monestiez P, Durbec JP, Candau JN (2007) Identifying spatial relationships at multiple scales: principal coordinates of neighbour matrices (PCNM) and geostatistical approaches. Ecography 30:385–399.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2007.0906-7590.04911.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bertness MD, Callaway R (1994) Positive interactions in communities. Trends Ecol Evol 9:191–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boitsov VD, Karsakov AL, Trofimov AG (2012) Atlantic water temperature and climate in the Barents Sea, 2000–2009. ICES J Mar Sci 69:833–840CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brown WL, Wilson EO (1956) Character displacement. Syst Zool 5:49–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bruno JF, Stachowicz JJ, Bertness MD (2003) Inclusion of facilitation into ecological theory. Trends Ecol Evol 18:103–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Buckley NJ (1997) Spatial-concentration effects and the importance of local enhancement in the evolution of colonial breeding in seabirds. Am Nat 149:1091–1112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Camphuysen CJ, Webb A (1999) Multi-species feeding associations in North Sea seabirds: jointly exploiting a patchy environment. Ardea 87:177–198Google Scholar
  13. Chase JM, Leibold MA (2003) Ecological Niches: Linking classical and contemporary approaches. University of Chicago, ChicagoCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ciannelli L, Fauchald P, Chan KS, Agostini VN, Dingsor GE (2008) Spatial fisheries ecology: recent progress and future prospects. J Mar Syst 71:223–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Clua E, Grosvalet F (2001) Mixed-species feeding aggregation of dolphins, large tunas and seabirds in the Azores. Aquat Living Resour 14:11–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Connell JH (1983) On the prevalence and relative importance of interspecific competition: evidence from field experiments. Am Nat 122:661–696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cressie N, Wikle CW (2011) Statistics for Spatio-Temporal Data. Wiley,Google Scholar
  18. Cressie NAC (1993) Statistics for spatial data, revised edn. Wiley Inter-Science, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Davoren GK, Montevecchi WA, Anderson JT (2003) Search strategies of a pursuit-diving marine bird and the presence of prey patches. Ecol Monogr 73:463–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Denisenko SG, Titov OV (2003) Distribution of zoobenthos and primary production of plankton in the Barents Sea. Oceanology 43:72–82Google Scholar
  21. Dray S, Pelissier R, Couteron P, Fortin MJ, Legendre P, Peres-Neto PR, Bellier E, Bivand R, Blanchet FG, De Caceres M, Dufour AB, Heegaard E, Jombart T, Munoz F, Oksanen J, Thioulouse J (2012) Community ecology in the age of multivariate multiscale spatial analysis. Ecol Monogr 82:257–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Erikstad KE, Vader W (1989) Capelin selection by Common and Brünnich's guillemots during the prelaying season. Ornis Scand 20:151–155.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3676883 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Evans PGH (1982) Associations between seabirds and cetaceans—a review. Mamm Rev 12:187–206.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2907.1982.tb00015.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fauchald P (2009) Spatial interaction between seabirds and prey: review and synthesis. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 391:139–151.  https://doi.org/10.3354/meps07818 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fauchald P, Erikstad KE, Skarsfjord H (2000) Scale-dependent predator-prey interactions: the hierarchical spatial distribution of seabirds and prey. Ecology 81:773–783Google Scholar
  26. Fauchald P, Mauritzen M, Gjøsæter H (2006) Density-dependent migratory waves in the marine pelagic ecosystem. Ecology 87:2915–2924CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fauchald P, Skov H, Mauritzen-Skern M, Hausner VH, Johns D, Tveraa T (2011) Scale-dependent response diversity of seabirds to prey in the North Sea. Ecology 92:228–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Goovaerts P (1997) Geostatistics for natural resources evaluation. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  29. Gotelli NJ, Graves GR, Rahbek C (2010) Macroecological signals of species interactions in the Danish avifauna. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107:5030–5035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Goulard M, Voltz M (1992) Linear coregionalisation model: tools for estimation and choice of cross-variogram matrix. Mat Geol 24:269–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Grinnell J (1917) The niche-relationships of the California Thrasher. Auk 34:427–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Grover JP (1997) Ressource competition. Chapman Hall, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Grünbaum D, Veit RR (2003) Black-browed albatrosses foraging on antartic krill: density-dependence through local enhancement? Ecology 84:3265–3275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hoffman W, Heinemann D, Wiens JA (1981) The ecology of seabird feeding flocks in Alaska. Auk 98:437–456Google Scholar
  35. Ingvaldsen RB (2005) Width of the North Cape current and location of the Polar Front in the western Barents Sea. Geophys Res Lett 32:L16603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ingvaldsen RB, Loeng H, Ottersen G, Adlandsvik B (2003) Climate variability in the Barents Sea during the 20th century with focus on the 1990s. ICES Mar Sci Symp 219:160–168Google Scholar
  37. Kotliar N, Wiens J (1990) Multiples scales of patchiness and patch structure: a hierarchical framework for the study of heterogeneity. Oikos 59:253–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Legendre P (1993) Spatial autocorrelation: trouble or new paradigm. Ecology 74:1956–1973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Levin S (1992) The problem of pattern in Ecology. Ecology 73:1943–1967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lima SL (2002) Putting predators back into behavorial predator-prey interactions. Trends Ecol Evol 17:70–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. MacArthur RH (1972) Geographical ecology: patterns in the distribution of species. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  42. Maestre FT, Rodrigues F, Bautista S, Cortina J, Bellot J (2005) Spatial associations and patterns of perennial vegetation in a semi-arid stepee: a multivariate geostatistic approach. Plant Ecol 179:133–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. McIntire EJB, Fajardo A (2009) Beyond description: the active and effective way to infer processes from spatial patterns. Ecology 90:46–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mehlum F, Gabrielsen GW (1993) The diet of high-Arctic seabirds in coastal and ice-covered, pelagic areas near the Svalbard archipelago. Polar Res 12:1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Monestiez P, Goulard M, Charmet G (1994) Geostatistics for spatial genetic structures: study of wild population of perennial ryegrass. Theor Appl Genet 88:33–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Montevecchi WA, Myers RA (1996) Dietary changes of seabirds indicate shifts in pelagic food webs. Sarsia 80:313–322.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00364827.1996.10413606 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Nanos N, Pardo F, Nager JA, Pardos JA, Gil L (2005) Using multivariate factorial kriging for multiscale ordination: a case study. Can J For Res 35:2860–2874CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pebesma EJ, Duin RNM, Burrough PA (2005) Mapping seabird densities over the North Sea: spatially aggregated estimates and temporal changes. Environmetrics 16:573–587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Prozorkevich D, Sunnanå K (2016) Survey report from the joint Norwegian/Russian ecosystem survey in the Barents Sea and adjacent waters, August-October 2015. IMR/PINRO Jt Rep Ser 1/2016Google Scholar
  50. R Development Core Team (2015) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  51. Rahbek C, Graves GR (2001) Multiscale assessment of patterns of avian species richness. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:4534–4539.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.071034898 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ranta E, Rita H, Lindstrom K (1993) Competition versus cooperation success of individuals foraging alone and in groups. Am Nat 142:42–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ricklefs RE (1987) Community diversity: relative roles of local and regional processes. Science 235:167–171.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.235.4785.167 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rosenzweig M (1995) Species diversity in space and time. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Schauer U, Loeng H, Rudels B, Ozhigin VK, Dieck W (2002) Atlantic Water flow through the Barents and Kara Seas. Deep Sea Res Part 1. Oceanogr Res Pap 49:2281–2298.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0967-0637(02)00125-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Schneider DC (1989) Identifying the spatial scale of density-dependent interaction of predators with schooling fish in the southern Labrador current. J Fish Biol 35:109–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Schoener TW (1974) Ressource partitioning in ecological communities. Science 185:27–39.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4145.27 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Schoener TW (1983) Field experiments on interspecific competition. Am Nat 122:240–285.  https://doi.org/10.1086/284133 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Shealer DA (2002) Foraging behavior and food of seabirds. In: Schreiber EA, Burger J (eds) Biology of marine birds. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 137–178Google Scholar
  60. Sih A (1984) The behavioral response race between predator and prey. Am Nat 123:143–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Taper ML, Case JT (1992) Coevolution among competitors. Oxford Surveys in Evolutionary Biology 8:63–109Google Scholar
  62. Tasker ML, Jones PH, Dixon TJ, Blake BF (1984) Counting seabird at sea from ships: a review of methods employed and a suggestion for standardized approach. Auk 101:567–577Google Scholar
  63. Tilman D (1986) A consumer-resource approach to community structure. Am Zool 26:5–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Vilchis LI, Ballance LT, Fiedler PC (2006) Pelagic habitat of seabirds in the eastern tropical Pacific: effects of foraging ecology on habitat selection. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 315:279–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Wackernagel H (2003) Multivariate geostatistics: an introduction with application, 3rd edn. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Webster R, Oliver MA (2007) Geostatistics for environmental scientists. Statistics in practice. Wiley, ChichesterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Weimerkirsch H (2007) Are seabirds foraging for unpredictable resources? Deep Sea Res Part 2 Top Stud Oceanogr 54:211–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Welsh AH, Cunningham RB, Donnelly CF, Lindenmayer DB (1996) Modelling the abundance of rare species: statistical models for counts with extra zeros. Ecol Modell 88:297–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Wiens JA (1989) Spatial scaling in ecology. Funct Ecol 3:385–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Wiens JJ (2011) The niche, biogeography and species interactions. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 366:2336–2350.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2011.0059 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wood SN (2006) Generalized additive models. An introduction with R. CRC, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Wood SN, Augustin NH (2002) GAMs with integrated model selection using penalized regression splines and applications to environmental modelling. Ecol Modell 157:157–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Wootton JT (1994) The nature and consequences of indirect effects in ecological communities. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 25:443–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Yaragina NA, Dolgov A (2009) Ecosystem structure and resilience—a comparison between the Norwegian and the Barents Sea. Deep Sea Res Part 2 Top Stud Oceanogr 56:2141–2153.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Arctic and Marine BiologyUiT The Arctic University of NorwayTromsøNorway

Personalised recommendations