Population Ecology

, Volume 49, Issue 4, pp 305–316 | Cite as

Spatial density-dependent survival and development at different larval stages of the tiger beetle Cicindela japonica (Thunberg)

Original Article

Abstract

Conspecific competition is an important component of the ecological processes of many species. In the case of sessile consumers, high population densities lead to competition within conspecific populations that, in turn, affect the survival, growth, and reproduction of the individuals involved. This study quantified neighborhood crowding and evaluated the extent of density effects on a tiger beetle (Cicindela japonica Thunberg) population by monitoring individually identified larvae at regular intervals. As an index of conspecific competition, the neighborhood density (the number of other larvae within a given radius for each larva) of each individual was measured. The radius size representing the highest mean coefficient of variation of density was determined as a suitable scale for detecting the density effects. Multiple logistic regression analysis was carried out to evaluate the effects of three factors (neighborhood density, prey abundance, and environmental influences) on larval survival and development. The analysis revealed that the neighborhood density significantly influenced the survival and development of larvae through every larval stage from the first to the third-instars. Moreover, the neighborhood density had a stronger influence on larvae of the same instar as compared to that on those of different instars. Our results suggest that density-dependent mortality affects the tiger beetle larvae due to the lifestyle pattern of these sedentary, ambushing predators that exhibit an aggregated spatial distribution.

Keywords

Cicindela japonica Tiger beetle Conspecific competition Density-dependent mortality Neighborhood crowding Spatial distribution 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to T. Sota, K. Watanabe, Y. Takami, A. Satoh, M. Sasabe, and other members of the Laboratory of Animal Ecology, Graduate School of Science, Kyoto University, Japan, for their valuable and critical comments on the various drafts of this paper. Early versions of the manuscript were greatly improved by the comments of T. Saitoh and the two anonymous reviewers. We further thank the staff of the Kamigamo Experimental Station, Field Science and Research Center, Kyoto University, Japan, for their kind support of our research. This paper was supported by a Grant for the Biodiversity Research of the 21st Century COE (A14).

References

  1. Arnett AE, Gotelli NJ (2001) Pit-building decisions of larval ant lions: effects of larval age, temperature, food, and population source. J Insect Behav 14:89–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barnes H, Powell HT (1950) The development, general morphology and subsequent elimination of barnacle populations, Balanus crenatus and B. balanoides, after a heavy initial settlement. J Anim Ecol 19:175–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brust ML, Hoback WW, Skinner KF, Knisley CB (2006) Movement of Cicindela hirticollis say larvae in response to moisture and flooding. J Insect Behav 19:251–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chapin FS III, McGraw JB, Shaver GR (1989) Competition causes regular spacing of alder in Alaskan shrub tundra. Oecologia 79:412–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Condit R, Hubbell SP, Foster RB (1994) Density dependence in two understory tree species in a neotropical forest. Ecology 75:671–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Connell JH (1961) Influence of interspecific competition and other factors on the distribution of the barnacle Chthamalus stellatus. Ecology 42:710–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Criddle N (1907) Habits of some Manitoba “tiger beetle” (Cicindela). Can Entomol 39:105–114Google Scholar
  8. Dayan T, Simberloff D, Tchernov E, Yom-Tov T (1989) Inter- and intraspecific character displacement in mustelids. Ecology 70:1526–1539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Enoch F (1903) The life history of Cicindela campestris. Proc Entomol Soc Lond 1903:15–19Google Scholar
  10. Gotelli NJ (1997) Competition and coexistence of larval ant lions. Ecology 78:1761–1773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ganeshaiah KN, Belavadi VV (1986) Habitat segregation in four species of adult tiger beetles (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae). Ecol Entomol 11:147–154Google Scholar
  12. Grant PR, Schluter D (1984) Interspecific competition inferred from patterns of guild structure. In: Strong DR Jr, Simberloff D, Abele LG, Thistle AB (eds) Ecological communities: conceptual issues and the evidence. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, pp 201–231Google Scholar
  13. Greig-Smith P (1979) Pattern in vegetation. J Ecol 67:755–779CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Halton AP (2003) Neighbour-regulated mortality: the influence of positive and negative density dependence on tree populations in species-rich tropical forests. Ecol Lett 6:757–765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Harrison SP, Cappuccino N (1995) Using density-manipulation experiments to study population regulation. In: Cappuccino N, Price PW (eds) Population dynamics. Academic Press, London, UK, pp 131–147Google Scholar
  16. Hills JM, Thomason JC (2003) The ‘ghost of settlement past’ determines mortality and fecundity in the barnacle, Semibalanus balanoides. Oikos 101:529–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hoback WW, Rana RL, Stanley DW (2000a) Use of fatty acid stores by larvae and adults of a Nebraska salt marsh tiger beetle, Cicindela togata globicollis Casey. Great Plains Res 10:127–144Google Scholar
  18. Hoback WW, Golick DA, Svatos TM, Spomer SM, Higley LG (2000b) Salinity and shade preferences result in ovipositional differences between sympatric tiger beetle species. Ecol Entomol 25:180–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hori M (1982) The biology and population dynamics of the tiger beetle, Cicindela japonica (Thunberg). Physiol Ecol Jpn 19:77–212Google Scholar
  20. Hughes G (1988) Spatial dynamics of self-thinning. Nature 336:521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ihaka R, Gentleman R (1996) R: a language for data analysis and graphics. J Comput Graph Stat 5:299–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jeffery CJ (2000) Settlement in different-sized patches by the gregarious intertidal barnacle Chamaesipho tasmanica Foster and Anderson in New South Wales. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 252:15–26PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kenkel NC (1988) Pattern of self-thinning in jack pine: testing the random mortality hypothesis. Ecology 69:1017–1024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kenkel NC, Hendrie ML, Bella IE (1997) A long-term study of Pinus banksiana population dynamics. J Veg Sci 8:241–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kleinbaum DG, Kupper LL, Morgenstern H (1982) Epidemiologic research: principles and quantitative methods. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Pearson DL, Knisley CB (1985) Evidence for food as a limiting resource in the life cycle of tiger beetles (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae). Oikos 45:161–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pearson DL, Mury EJ (1979) Character divergence and convergence among tiger beetles (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae). Ecology 60:557–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Powell RD (1990) The role of spatial pattern in the population biology of Centaurea diffusa. J Ecol 78:374–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pyke GH (1982) Local geographic distributions of bumblebees near Crested Butte, Colorado: competition and community structure. Ecology 63:555–573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Satoh A, Uéda T, Enokido Y, Hori M (2003) Patterns of species assemblages and geographical distributions associated with mandible size differences in coastal tiger beetles in Japan. Popul Ecol 45:67–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Satoh A, Sota T, Uéda T, Enokido Y, Paik JC, Hori M (2004) Evolutionary history of coastal tiger beetles in Japan based on a comparative phylogeography of four species. Mol Ecol 13:3057–3069PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Satoh A, Hori M (2004) Interpopulation differences in the mandible size of the coastal tiger beetle Lophyridia angulata associated with different sympatric species. Entomol Sci 7:211–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Shelford VE (1908) Life-histories and larval habits of tiger beetles. J Linn Soc Lond (Zoology) 30:157–184Google Scholar
  34. Shelford VE (1911) Physiological animal geography. J Morphol 22:551–618CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Turchin P (1995) Population regulation: old arguments and a new synthesis. In: Cappuccino N, Price PW (eds) Population dynamics. Academic Press, London, UK, pp 19–40Google Scholar
  36. Watkinson AR, Lonsdale WM, Firbank LG (1983) A neighbourhood approach to self-thinning. Oecologia 56:381–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Watt AS (1947) Pattern and process in the plant community. J Ecol 35:1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wethey DS (1984) Spatial pattern in barnacle settlement: day to day changes during the settlement season. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 64:687–698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Willis HL (1967) Bionomics and zoogeography of tiger beetles of saline habitats in the central United States (Coleoptera; Cicindelidae). Univ Kans Sci Bull 47:145–313Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society of Population Ecology and Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Zoology, Graduate School of ScienceKyoto UniversitySakyoJapan

Personalised recommendations