Oecologia

, Volume 138, Issue 4, pp 532–538 | Cite as

Threat of predation negates density effects in larval gray treefrogs

  • William J. ResetaritsJr.
  • Josef F. Rieger
  • Christopher A. Binckley
Population Ecology

Abstract

While density-dependence is central to most theory regarding population regulation and community structure, specific mechanisms that modify its effects in the absence of changes in consumer-resources ratios (e.g., thinning) are not well understood. To determine if the threat of predation alters effects of density, we investigated the interaction between density of larval treefrogs (Hyla chrysoscelis) and the non-lethal presence of a predatory fish (Enneacanthus obesus). A significant density by fish interaction was consistent for all response variables (e.g., larval survivorship, mass, and time to metamorphosis) driven by a complete lack of density effects in the presence of predators, while predator-free tanks showed classic density-dependent responses. Given that female H. chrysoscelis strongly avoid ovipositing in ponds containing fish, certain larval adaptations are apparently not constrained by maternal behavior and suggest redundancy in response to predators. Our data suggest that non-lethal effects of predators can determine larval performance irrespective of larval density, and that the non-lethal effects of predators can be strong whether lethal effects are strong or weak.

Keywords

Competition Density-dependence Non-lethal effects Predator induction Predator-prey interactions 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank D. Chalcraft, J. Loman, D. Skelly, and C. Resetarits for providing valuable comments on the manuscript. This project benefitted from logistical support from R. Turner and the Commanding Officers, Naval Security Group Activity Northwest. Funding was provided by NSF (DEB-0096051) and EPA-STAR (R825795-01-0) grants to W.J.R.

References

  1. Abrams PA (1987) Indirect interactions between species that share a predator: variations on a theme. In: Kerfoot WC, Sih A (eds) Predation: direct and indirect impacts on aquatic communities. University Press of New England, Hanover, pp 38–54Google Scholar
  2. Abrams PA (1992) Why don’t predators have positive effects on prey populations? Evol Ecol 6:449–457Google Scholar
  3. Abrams PA (1995) Implications of dynamically variable traits for identifying, classifying, and measuring direct and indirect effects in ecological communities. Am Nat 146:112–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alford RA (1999) Ecology: resource use, competition, and predation. In: McDiarmid RW, Altig R (eds) Tadpoles. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill, pp 240–278Google Scholar
  5. Altwegg R (2003) Multistage density dependence in an amphibian. Oecologia 136:46–50CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Andrewartha HG, Birch LC (1954) The distribution and abundance of animals. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IllGoogle Scholar
  7. Anholt BR, WernerEE, Skelly DK (2000) Effects of food and predators on the activity of four larval ranid frogs. Ecology 81:3509–3521Google Scholar
  8. Babbitt KJ, Tanner GW (2000) Use of temporary wetlands by anurans in a hydrologically modified landscape. Wetlands 20:313–322Google Scholar
  9. Berven KA (1990) Factors affecting population fluctuations in the larval and adult stages of the wood frog (Rana sylvatica). Ecology 71:1599–1608Google Scholar
  10. Binckley CA, Resetarits WJ Jr (2002) Reproductive decisions under threat of predation: squirrel treefrog (Hyla squirella) responses to banded sunfish (Enneacanthus obesus). Oecologia 130:157–161Google Scholar
  11. Binckley CA, Resetarits WJ Jr (2003) Functional equivalence of non-lethal effects: generalized fish avoidance determines distribution of gray treefrog (Hyla chrysoscelis) larvae. Oikos 102:623–629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Blaustein L (1999) Oviposition site selection in response to risk of predation: evidence from aquatic habitats and consequences for population dynamics and community structure. In: Wasser SP (ed) Evolutionary theory and processes: modern perspectives. Kluwer, Netherlands, pp 441–456Google Scholar
  13. Bolker B, Holyoak M, Klivan V, Rowe L, Schmitz O (2003) Connecting theoretical and empirical studies of trait-mediated interactions. Ecology 84:1101–1114Google Scholar
  14. Brandon RN (1988) The levels of selection: a hierarchy of interactors. In: Plotkin HC (ed) The role of behavior in evolution. MIT, Cambridge, Mass, pp 51–71Google Scholar
  15. Brockelman WY (1969) An analysis of density effects and predation in Bufo americanus tadpoles. Ecology 50:632–644Google Scholar
  16. Cappuccino N, Price PW (1995) Population dynamics: new approaches and synthesis. Academic, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. Chalcraft DR, Resetarits WJ Jr (2003a) Predator identity and ecological impacts: functional redundancy or functional diversity? Ecology 84:2407–2418Google Scholar
  18. Chalcraft DR, Resetarits WJ Jr (2003b) Mapping functional similarity on the basis of trait similarities. Am Nat 162:390–402CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Chesson P (1996) Matters of scale in the dynamics of populations and communities. In: Floyd RB, Sheppard AW, De Barro PJ (eds) Frontiers of population ecology. CSIRO, Melbourne, pp 353–368Google Scholar
  20. DeBenedictis PA (1974) Interspecific competition between tadpoles of Rana pipiens and Rana sylvatica: an experimental field study. Ecol Monogr 44:129–151Google Scholar
  21. Dickman M (1968) The effect of grazing by tadpoles on the structure of a periphyton community. Ecology 49:1188–1190Google Scholar
  22. Eason GW, Fauth JE (2001) Ecological correlates of anuran species richness in temporary pools: a field study in South Carolina, USA. Isr J Zool 47:347–365Google Scholar
  23. Fauth JE (1990) Interactive effects of predators and early larval dynamics of the treefrog Hyla chrysoscelis. Ecology 71:1609–1616Google Scholar
  24. Fauth JE, Resetarits WJ Jr (1991) Interactions between the salamander Siren intermedia and the keystone predator Notophthalmus viridescens. Ecology 72:827–838Google Scholar
  25. Gause GF (1934) The struggle for existence. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore, MdGoogle Scholar
  26. Gause GF (1935) Experimental demonstration of Volterra’s periodic oscillation in the numbers of animals. J Exp Biol 12:44–48Google Scholar
  27. Haldane JBS (1953) Animal populations and their regulation. New Biol 15:9–24Google Scholar
  28. Harper JL (1967) A Darwinian approach to plant ecology. J Ecol 55:247–270Google Scholar
  29. Hecnar SJ, M’Closkey RT (1996) The effects of predatory fish on amphibian species richness and distribution. Biol Conserv 79:123–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Holt RD (1985) Population dynamics in two-patch environments: some anomalous consequences of optimal habitat distribution. Theor Popul Biol 28:181–208Google Scholar
  31. Huey RB, Hertz PE, Sinervo B (2003) Behavioral drive versus behavioral inertia in evolution: a null model approach. Am Nat 161:357–366CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Johnson DH (1995) Statistical sirens: the allure of nonparametrics. Ecology 76:1998–2000Google Scholar
  33. Kats LB, Dill LM (1998) The scent of death: chemosensory assessment of predation risk by prey animals. Ecoscience 5:361–394Google Scholar
  34. Kats LB, Petranka JW, Sih A (1988) Antipredator defenses and the persistence of amphibian larvae with fishes. Ecology 69:1820–1865Google Scholar
  35. Lawler SP (1989) Behavioral responses to predators and predation risk in four species of larval anurans. Anim Behav 38:1039–1047Google Scholar
  36. Le Cren ED (1973) The population dynamics of young trout (Salmon trutta) in relation to density and territorial behavior. Rapp PV Reun Int Explor Mer 164:241–246Google Scholar
  37. Lima SL (1998) Nonlethal effects in the ecology of predator-prey interactions. Bioscience 48:25–34Google Scholar
  38. Lima SL, Dill LM (1990) Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. Can J Zool 68:619–640Google Scholar
  39. Lotka AJ (1932) The growth of mixed populations: two species competing for a common food supply. J Wash Acad Sci 22:461–469Google Scholar
  40. Lubchenco J (1978) Plant species diversity in a marine intertidal community: importance of herbivore food preference and algal competitive abilities. Am Nat 112:23–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McCollum SA, Van Buskirk J (1996) Costs and benefits of a predator-induced polyphenism in the gray treefrog Hyla chrysoscelis. Evolution 50:583–593Google Scholar
  42. Morin PJ (1983) Predation, competition and the composition of larval anuran guilds. Ecol Monogr 53:119–138Google Scholar
  43. Murdoch WW (1994) Population regulation in theory and practice. Ecology 75:271–287Google Scholar
  44. Murphy PJ (2003) Does reproductive site choice in a neotropical frog mirror variable risks facing offspring? Ecol Monogr 73:45–67Google Scholar
  45. Nelder JA (1977) A reformulation of linear models. J R Statist Soc A. 140:48–77Google Scholar
  46. Nicholson AJ (1933) The balance of animal populations. J Anim Ecol 2:131–178Google Scholar
  47. Nicholson AJ (1957) The self adjustment of populations to change. Cold Spring Harbor Symp Quant Biol 22:153–172Google Scholar
  48. Nicholson AJ, Bailey VA (1935) The balance of animal populations. Proc Zool Soc Lond Part 3 551–598Google Scholar
  49. Paine RT (1966) Food web complexity and species diversity. Am Nat 100:65–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Park T (1948) Experimental studies of interspecies competition. I. Competition between populations of the four beetles, Tribolium confusum Duvall and Tribolium castaneum Herbst. Ecol Monogr 18:267–307Google Scholar
  51. Peacor SD (2002) Positive effect of predators on prey growth rate through induced modifications of prey behavior. Ecol Lett 5:77–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Peacor SD, Werner EE (2001) The contribution of trait-mediated indirect effects to the net effects of a predator. Proc Natl Acad Sci 98:3904–3908PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Pearl R (1925) The growth of populations. Q Rev Biol 2:532–548Google Scholar
  54. Pearl R, Reed LJ (1920) On the rate of growth of the population of the United States since 1790 and its mathematical representation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 6:275–288Google Scholar
  55. Petranka JW (1989) Density-dependent growth and survival of larval Ambystoma: evidence from whole-pond manipulations. Ecology 70:1752–1767Google Scholar
  56. Petranka JW, Kats LB, Sih A (1987) Predator-prey interactions among fish and larval amphibians: use of chemical cues to detect predatory fish. Anim Behav 35:426–434Google Scholar
  57. Relyea RA (2000) Trait-mediated indirect effects in larval anurans: reversing competitive outcomes with the threat of predation. Ecology 81:2278–2289Google Scholar
  58. Relyea RA (2001) The relationship between predation risk and antipredator responses in larval anurans. Ecology 82:541–554Google Scholar
  59. Relyea RA (2002a) The many faces of predation: How induction, selection, and thinning combine to alter prey phenotypes. Ecology 83:1953–1964Google Scholar
  60. Relyea RA (2002b) Competitor-induced plasticity in tadpoles: consequences, cues, and connections to predator-induced plasticity. Ecol Monogr 72:523–540Google Scholar
  61. Relyea RA, Werner EE (1999) Quantifying the relation between predator-induced behavior and growth performance in larval anurans. Ecology 80:2117–2124Google Scholar
  62. Resetarits WJ Jr (1996) Oviposition site choice and life history evolution. Am Zool 36:205–215Google Scholar
  63. Resetarits WJ Jr (2001) Experimental evidence that past predation affects community assembly: fish avoidance in a colonizing/ovipositing aquatic beetle. Oecologia 129:155–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Resetarits WJ Jr, Fauth JE (1998) From cattle tanks to Carolina bays: the utility of model systems for understanding natural communities. In: Resetarits WJ Jr, Bernardo J (eds) Experimental ecology: issues and perspectives. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 133–151Google Scholar
  65. Resetarits WJ Jr, Wilbur HM (1989) Choice of oviposition site by Hyla chrysoscelis: role of predators and competitors. Ecology 70:220–228Google Scholar
  66. Rieger JF (2002) The effect of a predator gradient on female oviposition site selection and larval performance. Thesis, Old Dominion University, NorfolkGoogle Scholar
  67. Rosenzweig ML (1987) Habitat selection as a source of biological diversity. Evol Ecol 1:15–30Google Scholar
  68. Royama T (1977) Population persistence and density dependence. Ecol Monogr 47:1–35Google Scholar
  69. Sahai H, Ageel M I (2000) The analysis of variance: fixed, random and mixed models. Birkhauser, BostonGoogle Scholar
  70. SAS Institute (1998) SAS/STAT User’s Guide, Release 8.0. SAS Institute, Cary, N.C.Google Scholar
  71. Scott DE (1990) Effects of larval density in Ambystoma opacum: an experiment in large-scale field enclosures. Ecology 71:296–306Google Scholar
  72. Seale DB (1980) Influence of amphibian larvae on primary production, nutrient flux, and competition in a pond ecosystem. Ecology 61:1531–1550Google Scholar
  73. Skelly DK (1992) Field evidence for a cost of behavioral antipredator responses in a larval amphibian. Ecology 73:704–708Google Scholar
  74. Skelly DK, Werner EE (1990) Behavioral and life-history responses of larval American toads to an odonate predator. Ecology 71:2313–2322Google Scholar
  75. Smith DC (1983) Factors controlling tadpole populations of the chorus frog (Pseudacris triseriata) on Isle Royale, Michigan. Ecology 68:344–350Google Scholar
  76. Smith DC (1987) Adult recruitment in chorus frogs: effects of size and date at metamorphosis. Ecology 68:344–350Google Scholar
  77. Snodgrass JW, Bryan AL Jr, Burger J (2000) Development of expectations of larval amphibian assemblage structure in southeastern depression wetlands. Ecol Applic 10:1219–1229Google Scholar
  78. Steele RGD, Torrie JH (1980) Principles and procedures of statistics: a biometrical approach. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  79. Steinwascher K (1978) Interference and exploitation competition among tadpoles of Rana utricularia. Ecology 59:1039–1046Google Scholar
  80. Turchin P (1999) Population regulation: a synthetic view. Oikos 84:153–159Google Scholar
  81. Van Buskirk J, McCollum SA (2000a) Influence of tail shape on tadpole swimming performance. J Exp Biol 203:2149–2158PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Van Buskirk J, McCollum SA (2000b) Functional mechanisms of an inducible defence in tadpoles: morphology and behaviour influence mortality risk from predation. J Evol Biol 13:336–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Van Buskirk J, Yurewicz KL (1998) Effects of predators on prey growth rate: relative contributions of thinning and reduced activity. Oikos 82:20–28Google Scholar
  84. Van Buskirk J, McCollum SA, Werner EE (1997) Natural selection for environmentally induced phenotypes in tadpoles. Evolution 51:1983–1992Google Scholar
  85. Vandermeer JH (1969) The competitive structure of communities: an experimental approach with protozoa. Ecology 50:362–371Google Scholar
  86. Volterra V (1926) Fluctuations in the abundance of a species considered mathematically. Nature 118:558–560Google Scholar
  87. Wellborn GA, Skelly DK, Werner EE (1996) Mechanisms creating structure across a freshwater habitat gradient. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 27:337–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Werner EE (1986) Amphibian metamorphosis: growth rate, predation risk, and the optimal size at transformation. Am Nat 128:319–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Werner EE (1991) Nonlethal effects of a predator on competitive interactions between two anuran larvae. Ecology 72:1709–1720Google Scholar
  90. Werner EE, Anholt BR (1996) Predator-induced behavioral indirect effects: consequences to competitive interactions in anuran larvae. Ecology 77:157–169Google Scholar
  91. Werner EE, McPeek MA (1994) Direct and indirect effects of predators on two anuran species along an environmental gradient. Ecology 75:197–213Google Scholar
  92. Werner EE, Peacor SD (2003) A review of trait-mediated indirect interactions in ecological communities. Ecology 84:1083–1100Google Scholar
  93. Wilbur HM (1972) Competition, predation, and the structure of the Ambystoma-Rana sylvatica community. Ecology 53:3–21Google Scholar
  94. Wilbur HM (1977a) Density-dependent aspects of growth and metamorphosis in Bufo americanus. Ecology 58:196–200Google Scholar
  95. Wilbur HM (1977b) Interactions of food level and population density in Rana sylvatica. Ecology 58:206–209Google Scholar
  96. Wilbur HM (1987) Regulation of structure in complex systems: experimental temporary pond communities. Ecology 68:1437–1452Google Scholar
  97. Wilbur HM (1997) Experimental ecology of food webs: complex systems in temporary ponds. Ecology 78:2279–2302Google Scholar
  98. Wilbur HM, Collins JP (1973) Ecological aspects of amphibian metamorphosis. Science 182:1305–1314Google Scholar
  99. Wit CT de (1960) On competition. Versl Landbouwkd Onderz Ned 66:1–82Google Scholar
  100. Woodward BD (1982) Tadpole interactions in a desert anuran community. Oecologia 54:96–100Google Scholar
  101. Woodward BD (1983) Predatory-prey interactions and breeding-pond species in a desert anuran community. Ecology 64:1549–1555Google Scholar
  102. Wootton JT (1993) Indirect effects and habitat use in an intertidal community: interaction chains and interaction modifications. Am Nat 141:71–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • William J. ResetaritsJr.
    • 1
  • Josef F. Rieger
    • 1
  • Christopher A. Binckley
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Biological SciencesOld Dominion UniversityNorfolkUSA

Personalised recommendations