Advertisement

Resource concentration mechanisms facilitate foraging success in simulations of a pulsed oligotrophic wetland

  • Simeon YurekEmail author
  • Donald L. DeAngelis
Research Article
  • 39 Downloads

Abstract

Context

Movement of prey on hydrologically pulsed, spatially heterogeneous wetlands can result in transient, high prey concentrations, when changes in landscape features such as connectivity between flooded areas alternately facilitate and impede prey movement. Predators track and exploit these concentrations, depleting them as they arise.

Objectives

We sought to describe how prey pulses of fish rapidly form and persist on wetland landscapes, while enduring constant consumption by wading birds, without being fully depleted. Specifically, we questioned how is the predator–prey relationship mediated by interactions between animal movement and dynamic landscape connectivity?

Methods

Two models were developed of the predator–prey-landscape system with qualitatively different representations of space, to identify and quantify prey pulsing dynamics that were robust across modeled assumptions. The first included a homogeneous landscape described by simple geometry, and implicit fish movement as wetland volume contracts. The second modeled transverse movement across a heterogeneous landscape, with isolated drying patches.

Results

Both models produced rapid fish prey concentrations as the wetland dried to shallow water depths. These conditions are critical for making prey available to wading birds. Fish were also rapidly depleted by birds, representing daily caloric intake supporting birds. Model 1 provided average estimates across the modeled domain. Model 2 mapped locations of emerging prey hotspots on the landscape through time.

Conclusions

Our models tracked predator, prey, and landscape dynamics in parallel, inducing systems dynamics from empirical observations. Explicit inclusion of dynamic wetland hydrologic connectivity, a key landscape mechanism, allowed for a comprehensive picture of links between landscape dynamics and the adapted predator–prey system.

Keywords

Pulsed ecosystem Fish community Wading bird colonies Seasonality Hydrology Landscape topography 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank the editors of The Auk for permission to reprint results from Kushlan (1976), and Gus Engman and four anonymous reviewers for their generous time and contributions. This work was supported by The USGS’s Greater Everglades Priority Ecosystem Science and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Supplementary material

10980_2019_784_MOESM1_ESM.docx (275 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 274 kb)

References

  1. Agostini VN, Bakun A (2002) Ocean triads’ in the Mediterranean Sea: physical mechanisms potentially structuring reproductive habitat suitability (with example application to European anchovy, Engraulis encrasicolus). Fish Oceanogr 11(3):129–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bakun A (2006) Wasp-waisted populations in marine ecosystem dynamics: navigating the “predator pit” topographies. Prog Oceanogr 68:271–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bancroft GT, Strong AM, Sawicki RJ, Hoffman W, Jewell SD (1994) Relationship among wading bird foraging patterns, colony locations, and hydrology in the Everglades. In: Davis SM, Ogden JC (eds) Everglades, the ecosystem and its restoration. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, pp 615–657Google Scholar
  4. Bayley PB (1991) The flood pulse advantage and the restoration of river-floodplain systems. Regul Rivers Res Manag 6:75–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beerens JM, Gawlik DE, Herring G, Cook MI (2011) Dynamic habitat selection by two wading bird species with divergent foraging strategies in a seasonally fluctuating wetland. Auk 128(4):651–662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beerens JM, Noonburg EG, Gawlik DE (2015) Linking dynamic habitat selection with wading bird foraging distributions across resource gradients. PLoS ONE 10(6):e0128182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Botson BA, Gawlik DE, Trexler JC (2016) Mechanisms that generate resource pulses in a fluctuating wetland. PLoS ONE.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0158864 Google Scholar
  8. Box GE (1976) Science and statistics. J Am Stat Assoc 71(356):791–799CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Calabrese JM, Fagan WF (2004) A comparison–shopper’s guide to connectivity metrics. Front Ecol Environ 2(10):529–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Davis SM, Gunderson LH, Park WA, Richardson J, Mattson J (1994) Landscape dimension, composition, and function in a changing Everglades ecosystem. In: Davis SM, Ogden JC (eds) Everglades, the ecosystem and its restoration. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, pp 419–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Deacy W, Leacock W, Armstrong JB, Stanford JA (2016) Kodiak brown bears surf the salmon red wave: direct evidence from GPS collared individuals. Ecology 97(5):1091–1098CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dorn NJ, Cook MI (2015) Hydrological disturbance diminishes predator control in wetlands. Ecology 96:2984–2993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fleming DM, Wolff WF, DeAngelis DL (1994) Importance of landscape heterogeneity to wood storks in Florida Everglades. Environ Manag 18(5):743–757CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Frederick P, Gawlik DE, Ogden JC, Cook MI, Lusk M (2009) The White Ibis and Wood Stork as indicators for restoration of the everglades ecosystem. Ecol Indic 9(6):S83–S95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Frederick PC, Ogden JC (2001) Pulsed breeding of long-legged wading birds and the importance of infrequent severe drought conditions in the Florida Everglades. Wetlands 21(4):484–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gaff H, DeAngelis DL, Gross LJ, Salinas R, Shorrosh M (2000) A dynamic landscape model for fish in the Everglades and its application to restoration. Ecol Model 127(1):33–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gawlik DE (2002) The effects of prey availability on the numerical response of wading birds. Ecol Monogr 72:329–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Goodwin BJ (2003) Is landscape connectivity a dependent or independent variable? Landscape Ecol 18(7):687–699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Goodwin BJ, Fahrig L (2002) How does landscape structure influence landscape connectivity? Oikos 99:552–570CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Goss CW, Loftus WF, Trexler JC (2014) Seasonal fish dispersal in ephemeral wetlands of the Florida Everglades. Wetlands 34(1):147–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gunderson LH, Loftus WF (1993) The Everglades. In: Martin WH, Boyce SG, Echternacht AC (eds) Biodiversity of the Southeastern United States: lowland terrestrial communities. John Wiley & Sons Inc, New York, pp 199–255Google Scholar
  22. Hoch JM, Sokol ER, Parker AD, Trexler JC (2015) Migration strategies vary in space time, and among species in the small-fish metacommunity of the Everglades. Copeia 103(1):157–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Johnson WC, Werner B, Guntenspergen GR, Voldseth RA, Millett B, Naugle DE, Tulbure M, Carroll RW, Tracy J, Olawsky C (2010) Prairie wetland complexes as landscape functional units in a changing climate. Bioscience 60(2):128–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jones J, U.S. Geological Survey (2011) Everglades Depth Estimation Network (EDEN) October 2011 Digital Elevation Model (DEM)Google Scholar
  25. Junk WJ, Bayley PB, Sparks RE (1989) The flood pulse concept in river–floodplain systems. Can Spec Publ Fish Aquat Sci 106(1):110–127Google Scholar
  26. Kahl MP (1964) Food ecology of the wood stork (Mycteria americana) in Florida. Ecol Monogr 34(2):98–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kauffman MJ, Varley N, Smith DW, Stahler DR, MacNulty DR, Boyce MS (2007) Landscape heterogeneity shapes predation in a newly restored predator–prey system. Ecol Lett 10(8):690–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Klassen JA, Gawlik DE, Frederick PC (2016) Linking wading bird prey selection to number of nests. J Wildl Manag 80(8):1450–1460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kushlan JA (1973) An ecological study of an Alligator Pond in the Big Cypress Swamp of southern Florida. M.S Thesis. University of MiamiGoogle Scholar
  30. Kushlan JA (1974) Effects of a natural fish kill on the water quality, plankton, and fish population of a pond in the Big Cypress Swamp, Florida. Trans Am Fish Soc 103(2):235–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kushlan JA (1976) Wading bird predation in a seasonally fluctuating pond. Auk 93(3):464–476Google Scholar
  32. Kushlan JA (1986). Responses of wading birds to seasonally fluctuating water levels: strategies and their limits. Colon Waterbirds, pp 155–162Google Scholar
  33. Kushlan JA, Ogden JC, Higer AL (1975) Relation of water level and fish availability to wood stork reproduction in the Southern Everglades, Florida. Rep. 75-434, US Geological Survey, Tallahassee, FL. Liston SE. 2006. Interactions between nutrient availability and hydroperiod shape macroinvertebrate communities in Florida Everglades marshes. Hydrobiologia 569:343–357Google Scholar
  34. MATLAB and Statistics Toolbox Release (2016) The MathWorks, Inc., Natick, Massachusetts, United StatesGoogle Scholar
  35. Middleton BA (ed) (2002) Flood pulsing in wetlands: restoring the natural hydrological balance. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Norris K, Johnstone I (1998) The functional response of oystercatchers (Haematopus ostralegus) searching for cockles (Cerastoderma edule) by touch. J Anim Ecol 67(3):329–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Obaza A, DeAngelis DL, Trexler JC (2011) Using data from an encounter sampler to model fish dispersal. J Fish Biol 78:495–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Odum EP (1969) The strategy of ecosystem development. Science 164:262–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Odum WE, Odum EP, Odum HT (1995) Nature’s pulsing paradigm. Estuaries 18(4):547–555 Papers from William E. Odum Memorial Symposium (Dec., 1995) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ogden JC (1994) A comparison of wading bird nesting colony dynamics (1931-1946 and 1974-1989) as an indication of ecosystem conditions in the Southern Everglades. In: Davis SM, Ogden JC (eds) Everglades, the ecosystem and its restoration. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, pp 533–570Google Scholar
  41. Ostfeld RS, Keesing F (2000) Pulsed resources and community dynamics of consumers in terrestrial ecosystems. Trends Ecol Evol 15(6):232–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Poff NL, Allan JD, Bain MB, Karr JR, Prestegaard KL, Richter BD, Sparks RE, Stromberg JC (1997) The natural flow regime. Bioscience 47:769–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ruetz CR, Trexler JC, Jordan F, Loftus WF, Perry SA (2005) Population dynamics of wetland fishes: spatio-temporal patterns synchronized by hydrological disturbance? J Anim Ecol 74:322–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Swanson GA, Duebbert HF (1989) Wetland habitats of waterfowl in the prairie pothole region. Northern Prairie Wetlands. Iowa State University Press, Ames, pp 228–267Google Scholar
  45. Tiner RW (2003) Geographically isolated wetlands of the United States. Wetlands 23(3):494–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Tischendorf L, Fahrig L (2000) How should we measure landscape connectivity? Landscape Ecol 15(7):633–641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tockner K, Stanford JA (2002) Riverine flood plains: present state and future trends. Environ Conserv 29(03):308–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Trexler JC, Loftus WF, Jordan F, Chick JH, Kandl KL, McElroy TC, Bass OL Jr (2002) Ecological scale and its implications for freshwater fishes in the Florida Everglades. In: Porter JW, Porter KG (eds) The Everglades, Florida Bay, and coral reefs of the Florida keys: an ecosystem sourcebook. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 53–181Google Scholar
  49. U.S. Geological Survey, National Water Information System (2017). https://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/inventory?<agency_code=USGS&site_no=02288900>
  50. van Gils JA, Spaans B, Dekinga A, Piersma T (2006) Foraging in a tidally structured environment by red knots (Calidris canutus): ideal but not free. Ecology 87(5):1189–1202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. White TCR (2005) Why does the world stay green: nutrition and survival of plant-eaters. CSIRO Publishing, CollingwoodCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wolff WF (1994) An individual-oriented model of a wading bird nesting colony. Ecol Model 72(1):75–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Yang LH, Bastow JL, Spence KO, Wright AN (2008) What can we learn from resource pulses. Ecology 89(3):621–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Yurek S, DeAngelis DL, Trexler JC, Jopp F, Donalson DD (2013) Simulating mechanisms for dispersal, production and stranding of small forage fish in temporary wetland habitats. Ecol Model 250:391–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Yurek S, DeAngelis DL, Trexler JC, Klassen JA, Larsen LG (2016) Persistence and diversity of directional landscape connectivity improves pulsed energy transfers in dynamic oligotrophic wetlands. Ecol Complex 28:1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© This is a U.S. government work and its text is not subject to copyright protection in the United States; however, its text may be subject to foreign copyright protection 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.U. S. Geological SurveyWetland and Aquatic Research CenterGainesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations