Oecologia

, Volume 85, Issue 1, pp 48–56 | Cite as

Predation and drift of lotic macroinvertebrates during colonization

  • J. Lancaster
Original Papers

Summary

A field experiment was carried out to determine the effect of an invertebrate predator on the colonization and drift of benthic macroinvertebrates in experimental stream channels. Lotic invertebrates colonized four replicate channels: two controls with no predators, and two channels with low densities (2.8 m−2) of predatory stonefly nymphs, Doroneuria baumanni (Perlidae). Immigration rates were measured at the inflow of two other channels. Drift rates of invertebrates immigrating to and emigrating from channels were measured daily, and benthic samples were collected every five days. Over a 25-day colonization period, benthic densities of Baetis nymphs and larval Chironomidae were reduced by D. baumanni. Colonization curves were fit with a power function and significantly different colonization rates were indicated for both Baetis and chironomids in predation and control channels. A predator-induced drift response was exhibited by Baetis only and this response was size-dependent. In the presence of D. baumanni, large Baetis drifted more frequently than small nymphs and, correspondingly, small nymphs were more frequent in the benthos. Net predator impacts on invertebrate densities in channel substrates were partitioned into predator-induced drift and prey consumption. These estimates suggest that predator avoidance by Baetis is a prominent mechanism causing density reductions in the presence of predators. Reductions in the density of Chironomidae, however, were attributed to prey consumption only. A rainstorm during the experiment demonstrated that stream flow disruptions can override the influence of predators on benthic invertebrates, at least temporarily, and re-set benthic densities.

Key words

Colonization Drift Predation Stoneflies Streams 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allan JD, Feifarek BP (1989) Distances travelled by drifting mayfly nymphs: factors influencing return to the substrate. J N Am Benthol Soc 8:322–330Google Scholar
  2. Allan JD, Flecker AS, McClintock NL (1987) Prey size selection by carnivorous stoneflies. Limnol Oceanogr 32:864–872Google Scholar
  3. Ciborowski JJH, Clifford HF (1984) Short-term colonization patterns of lotic macroinvertebrates. Can J Fish Aquatic Sci 41:1626–1633Google Scholar
  4. Corkum LD, Clifford HF (1980) The importance of species associations and substrate types to behavioural drift. In: Flannagan JF, Marshall KE (eds) Advances in Ephemeroptera biology. Plenum Press, New York, pp 331–341Google Scholar
  5. Fisher SG, Gray LJ, Grimm NB, Busch DE (1982) Temporal succession in a desert stream ecosystem following flash flooding. Ecol Monogr 52:93–110Google Scholar
  6. Gore JA (1979) Patterns of initial benthic recolonization of a reclaimed coal strip-mined river channels. Can J Zool 57:2429–2439Google Scholar
  7. Hildrew AG, Dobson MK, Groom AP, Ibbotson A, Lancaster J, Rundle S (1989) Flow and retention in the ecology of stream invertebrates. Verh Inter Verein Limnol (in press)Google Scholar
  8. Irvine J (1985) Effects of successive flow perturbations on stream invertebrates. Can J Fish Aquatic Sci 42:1922–1927Google Scholar
  9. Lancaster J, Hildrew AG, Townsend CR (1990) Stream flow and predation effects on the spatial dynamics of benthic invertebrates. Hydrobiologia (in press)Google Scholar
  10. Malmqvist B, Sjöström P (1987) Stream drift as a consequence of disturbance by invertebrate predators-field and laboratory experiments. Oecologia 74:396–403Google Scholar
  11. Molles MC, Pietruska RD (1983) Mechanisms of prey selection by predaceous stoneflies: roles of prey morphology, behavior and predator hunger. Oecologia 57:25–31Google Scholar
  12. Molles MC, Pietruszka RD (1987) Prey selection by a stonefly — the influence of hunger and prey size. Oecologia 72:473–478Google Scholar
  13. Peckarsky BL (1980) Predator-prey interactions between stoneflies and mayflies: behavioural observations. Ecology 61:932–943Google Scholar
  14. Peckarsky BL (1984) Predator-prey interactions among aquatic insects. In: Resh VH, Rosenberg DM (eds) The ecology of aquatic insects. Praeger, New York, pp 196–254Google Scholar
  15. Peckarsky BL (1985) Do predaceous stoneflies and siltation affect the structure of stream insect communities colonizing enclosures? Can J Zool 63:1519–1530Google Scholar
  16. Peckarsky BL, Dodson SI (1980a) Do stonefly predators influence benthic distributions in streams? Ecology 61:1275–1282Google Scholar
  17. Peckarsky BL, Dodson SI (1980b) An experimental analysis of biological factors contributing to stream community structure. Ecology 61:1283–1290Google Scholar
  18. Peckarsky BL, Penton MA (1985) Is predaceous stonefly behaviour affected by competition? Ecology 66:1718–1728Google Scholar
  19. Peckarsky BL, Penton MA (1989) Mechanisms of prey selection by stream-dwelling stoneflies. Ecology 70:1203–1218Google Scholar
  20. Peckarsky BL, Horn SC, Statzner B (1990) Stonefly predation along a hydraulic gradient: a field test of the harsh-benign hypothesis. Freshwat Biol 24:181–191Google Scholar
  21. Power ME, Stout RJ, Cushing CE, Harper PP, Hauer FR, Matthews WJ, Moyle PB, Statzner B, Wais De Badgen IR (1988) Biotic and abiotic controls in river and stream communities. J N Am Benthol Soc 7:456–479Google Scholar
  22. Resh VH, Brown AV, Covich AP, Gurtz ME, Li HW, Minshall GW, Reice SR, Sheldon AL, Wallace JB, Wissmar R (1988) The role of disturbance in stream ecology. J N Am Benthol Soc 7:433–455Google Scholar
  23. Richardson JS (1989) Seasonal food limitation of detritivorous insects in a montane stream. Phd Thesis, University of British ColumbiaGoogle Scholar
  24. Sheldon AL (1977) Colonization curves: application to stream insects on semi-natural substrates. Oikos 28:256–261Google Scholar
  25. Sheldon AL (1984) Colonization dynamics of aquatic insects. In: Resh VH, Rosenberg DM (eds) The ecology of aquatic insects. Praeger, New York, pp 401–429Google Scholar
  26. Siegfied CA, Knight AW (1976) Prey selection by a setipalpian stonefly nymph, Acroneuria (Calineuria) californica Banks (Plecoptera: Perlidae). Ecology 57:603–608Google Scholar
  27. 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
  28. Statzner B, Gore JA, Resh VH (1988) Hydraulic stream ecology: observed patterns and potential applications. J N Am Benthol Soc 7:307–360Google Scholar
  29. Townsend CR (1989) The patch dynamics concept of stream community ecology. J N Am Benthol Soc 8:36–50Google Scholar
  30. Townsend CR, Hildrew AG (1976) Field experiments on the drifting, colonization, and continuous redistribution of stream benthos. J Anim Ecol 45:759–772Google Scholar
  31. Walde SJ, Davies RW (1984a) Invertebrate predation and lotic prey communities: evaluation of in situ enclosure/exclosure experiments. Ecology 65:1206–1213Google Scholar
  32. Walde SJ, Davies RW (1984b) The effect of intraspecific interference on Kogotus nonus (Plecoptera) foraging behaviour. Can J Zool 62:2221–2226Google Scholar
  33. Walton EO (1980) Invertebrate drift from predator-prey associations. Ecology 61:1486–1497Google Scholar
  34. Wiley MJ, Kohler SL (1981) An assessment of biological interactions in an epilithic stream community using time-lapse cinematography. Hydrobiologia 73:183–188Google Scholar
  35. Zar JH (1984) Biostatistical analysis, 2nd ed. Prentice-Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Lancaster
    • 1
  1. 1.Resource EcologyUniversity of British Columbia VancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations