Oecologia

, Volume 151, Issue 1, pp 22–32 | Cite as

Predator avoidance behavior in the pea aphid: costs, frequency, and population consequences

Population Ecology

Abstract

Induced prey defenses can be costly. These costs have the potential to reduce prey survival or reproduction and, therefore, prey population growth. I estimated the potential for predators to suppress populations of pea aphids (Acyrthosiphon pisum) in alfalfa fields through the induction of pea aphid predator avoidance behavior. I quantified (1) the period of non-feeding activity that follows a disturbance event, (2) the effect of frequent disturbance on aphid reproduction, and (3) the frequency at which aphids are disturbed by predators. In combination, these three values predict that the disturbances induced by predators can substantially reduce aphid population growth. This result stems from the high frequency of predator-induced disturbance, and the observation that even brief disturbances reduce aphid reproduction. The potential for predators to suppress prey populations through induction of prey defenses may be strongest in systems where (1) predators frequently induce prey defensive responses, and (2) prey defenses incur acute survival or reproductive costs.

Keywords

Induced defense Latency Non-consumptive interaction Non-lethal interaction Predation risk Trait-mediated interaction 

Supplementary material

References

  1. Anholt BR (1997) How should we test for the role of behaviour in population dynamics? Evol Ecol 11:633–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beckerman A, Benton TG, Ranta E, Kaitala V, Lundberg P (2002) Population dynamic consequences of delayed life-history effects. Trends Ecol Evol 17:263–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Caillaud MC, Via S (2000) Specialized feeding behavior influences both ecological specialization and assortative mating in sympatric host races of pea aphids. Am Nat 156:606–621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Campbell A, Mackauer M (1977) Reproduction and population growth of the pea aphid under laboratory and field conditions. Can Entomol 109:277–284Google Scholar
  5. Chapman RF (1998) The insects: structure and function, 4th edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  6. Dill LM, Fraser AHG, Roitberg BD (1990) The economics of escape behavior in the pea aphid, Acyrthosiphon pisum. Oecologia 83:473–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dixon AFG (1998) Aphid ecology: an optimization approach, 2nd edn. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  8. Feller W (1966) An introduction to probability theory and its applications. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Gilbert JJ (1999) Kairomone-induced morphological defenses in rotifers. In: Tollrian R, Harvell CD (eds) The ecology and evolution of inducible defenses. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 127–141Google Scholar
  10. Heimpel GE, Mangel M, Rosenheim JA (1998) Effects of time limitation and egg limitation on lifetime reproductive success of a parasitoid in the field. Am Nat 152:273–289CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Karban R, Baldwin IT (1997) Induced responses to herbivory. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  12. Kleinbaum DG, Klein M (2005) Survival analysis: a self-learning text, 2nd edn. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Kouame KL, Mackauer M (1992) Influence of starvation on development and reproduction in apterous virginoparae of the pea aphid, Acyrthosiphon pisum. Can Entomol 124:87–95Google Scholar
  14. Kuhlmann H-W, Kusch J, Heckmann K (1999) Predator-induced defenses in ciliated protozoa. In: Tollrian R, Harvell CD (eds) The ecology and evolution of inducible defenses. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 142–159Google Scholar
  15. Lima SL (1998a) Nonlethal effects in the ecology of predator–prey interactions. Bioscience 48:25–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lima SL (1998b) Stress and decision making under the risk of predation: recent developments from behavioral, reproductive, and ecological perspectives. Adv Study Behav 27:215–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lima SL, Dill LM (1990) Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. Can J Zool 68:619–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Losey JE, Denno RF (1998) Positive predator–predator interactions: enhanced predation rates and synergistic suppression of aphid populations. Ecology 79:2143–2152Google Scholar
  19. Mackay PA, Wellington WG (1975) A comparison of the reproductive patterns of apterous and alate virginoparous Acyrthosiphon pisum (Homoptera: Aphididae). Can Entomol 107:1161–1166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. McLean DL, Kinsey MG (1969) Probing behavior of the pea aphid, Acyrthosiphon pisum. IV. Effects of starvation on certain probing activities. Ann Entomol Soc Am 62:987–994Google Scholar
  21. McPeek MA, Peckarsky BL (1998) Life histories and the strengths of species interactions: combining mortality, growth, and fecundity effects. Ecology 79:867–879CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nelson E, Rosenheim J (2006) Encounters between aphids and their predators: the relative frequencies of disturbance and consumption. Entomol Exp Appl 118:211–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nelson E, Matthews C, Rosenheim J (2004) Predators reduce prey population growth by inducing changes in prey behavior. Ecology 85:1853–1858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Preisser EL, Bolnick DI, Benard MF (2005) Scared to death? The effects of intimidation and consumption in predator–prey interactions. Ecology 86:501–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Riessen HP, Sprules WG (1990) Demographic costs of antipredator defenses in Daphnia pulex. Ecology 71:1536–1546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Risebrow A, Dixon AFG (1987) Nutritional ecology of phloem-feeding insects. In: Slansky F, Rodriguez JG (eds) Nutritional ecology of insects, mites, spiders, and related invertebrates. Wiley, New York, pp 421–448Google Scholar
  27. Roitberg BD, Myers JH (1979) Behavioural and physiological adaptations of pea aphids (Homoptera: Aphididae) to high ground temperatures and predator disturbance. Can Entomol 111:515–519Google Scholar
  28. Roitberg BD, Myers JH, Frazer BD (1979) The influence of predators on the movement of apterous pea aphids between plants. J Anim Ecol 48:111–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rotheray GE (1989) Aphid predators: insects that eat greenfly. Richmond Pub. Co. SloughGoogle Scholar
  30. Roy HE, Pell JK, Clark SJ, Alderson PG (1998) Implications of predator foraging on aphid pathogen dynamics. J Invertebr Pathol 71:236–247PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. SAS (1994) JMP statistics and graphics guide: version 3. SAS Institute, CaryGoogle Scholar
  32. Schmitz OJ, Suttle KB (2001) Effects of top predator species on direct and indirect interactions in a food web. Ecology 82:2072–2081Google Scholar
  33. Schoener TW (1986) Mechanistic approaches to community ecology: a new reductionism? Am Zool 26:81–106Google Scholar
  34. Sih A (1987) Predators and prey lifestyles: an evolutionary and ecological overview. In: Kerfoot WC, Sih A (eds) Predation: direct and indirect impacts on aquatic communities. University Press of New England, Hanover, pp 203–224Google Scholar
  35. Sih A (1994) Predation risk and the evolutionary ecology of reproductive behaviour. J Fish Biol 45:111–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sih A, Englund G, Wooster D (1998) Emergent impacts of multiple predators on prey. Trends Ecol Evol 13:350–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Smith RH, Sibly RM (1985) Behavioural ecology and population dynamics: towards a synthesis. In: Sibly RM, Smith RH (eds) Behavioural ecology: ecological consequences of adaptive behaviour: the 25th symposium of the British Ecological Society, Reading, 1984. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford Oxfordshire, pp 577–591Google Scholar
  38. Snyder WE, Ives AR (2003) Interactions between specialist and generalist natural enemies: parasitoids, predators, and pea aphid biocontrol. Ecology 84:91–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Spitze K (1992) Predator-mediated plasticity of prey life history and morphology: Chaoborus americanus predation on Daphnia pulex. Am Nat 139:229–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tamaki G, Halfhill JE, Hathaway DO (1970) Dispersal and reduction of colonies of pea aphids by Aphidius smithi (Hymenoptera: Aphidiidae). Ann Entomol Soc Am 63:973–980Google Scholar
  41. Tollrian R, Dodson SI (1999) Inducible defenses in cladocera: constraints, costs, and multipredator environments. In: Tollrian R, Harvell CD (eds) The ecology and evolution of inducible defenses. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 177–202Google Scholar
  42. Tollrian R, Harvell CD (1999) The ecology and evolution of inducible defenses. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  43. University of California (1985) Integrated pest management for alfalfa hay. University of California, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, OaklandGoogle Scholar
  44. Walls M, Ketola M (1989) Effects of predator-induced spines on individual fitness in Daphnia pulex. Limnol Oceanogr 34:390–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Werner EE (1992) Individual behavior and higher-order species interactions. Am Nat 140:S5–S32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wilkinson TL, Douglas AE (1995) Aphid feeding, as influenced by disruption of the symbiotic bacteria: an analysis of the pea aphid (Acyrthosiphon pisum). J Insect Physiol 41:635–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Population Biology, Department of EntomologyUniversity of CaliforniaDavisUSA
  2. 2.Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and ManagementUniversity of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations