Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The advantage of alternative tactics of prey and predators depends on the spatial pattern of prey and social interactions among predators

Population Ecology

Cite this article

Abstract

Individual variation in behavioral strategies is ubiquitous in nature. Yet, explaining how this variation is being maintained remains a challenging task. We use a spatially-explicit individual-based simulation model to evaluate the extent to which the efficiency of an alternative spacing tactic of prey and an alternative search tactic of predators are influenced by the spatial pattern of prey, social interactions among predators (i.e., interference and information sharing) and predator density. In response to predation risk, prey individuals can either spread out or aggregate. We demonstrate that if prey is extremely clumped, spreading out may help when predators share information regarding prey locations and when predators shift to area-restricted search following an encounter with prey. However, dispersion is counter-selected when predators interact by interference, especially under high predator density. When predators search for more randomly distributed prey, interference and information sharing similarly affect the relative advantage of spreading out. Under a clumped prey spatial pattern, predators benefit from shifting their search tactic to an area-restricted search following an encounter with prey. This advantage is moderated as predator density increases and when predators interact either by interference or information sharing. Under a more random prey pattern, information sharing may deteriorate the inferior search tactic even more, compared to interference or no interaction among predators. Our simulation clarifies how interactions among searching predators may affect aggregation behavior of prey, the relative success of alternative search tactics and their potential to invade established populations using some other search or spacing tactics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Apaloo J (1997) Revisiting strategic models of evolution: the concept of neighborhood invader strategies. Theor Popul Biol 52:71–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnard CJ, Sibly RM (1981) Producers and scroungers: a general model and its application to captive flocks of house sparrows. Anim Behav 29:543–550

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bednekoff PA, Lima SL (1998) Randomness, chaos and confusion in the study of antipredator vigilance. Trends Ecol Evol 13:284–287

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Benhamou S (1992) Efficiency of area-concentrated searching behavior in a continuous patchy environment. J Theor Biol 159:67–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brockmann HJ (2001) The evolution of alternative strategies and tactics. Adv Stud Behav 30:1–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connell SD (2000) Is there safety-in-numbers for prey? Oikos 88:527–532

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farwell M, McLaughlin RL (2009) Alternative foraging tactics and risk taking in brook charr (Salvelinus fontinalis). Behav Ecol 20:913–921

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzpatrick BM, Shook K, Izally R (2009) Frequency-dependent selection by wild birds promotes polymorphism in model salamanders. BMC Ecol 9:12

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Giraldeau L-A, Valone TJ, Templeton JJ (2002) Potential disadvantages of using socially acquired information. Philos T R Soc B 357:1559–1566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grimm V, Railsback SF (2006) Individual-based modeling and ecology. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross MR (1996) Alternative reproductive strategies and tactics: diversity within sexes. Trends Ecol Evol 11:92–98

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hamblin S, Mathot KJ, Morand-Ferron J, Nocera JJ, Rieucau G, Giraledau L-A (2010) Predator inadvertent social information use favours reduced clumping of its prey. Oikos 119:286–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton WD (1971) Geometry for the selfish herd. J Theor Biol 31:295–311

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hancock PA, Milner-Gulland EJ, Keeling MJ (2006) Modelling the many-wrongs principle: the navigational advantages of aggregation in nomadic foragers. J Theor Biol 240:302–310

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hines AH, Long WC, Terwin JR, Thrush SF (2009) Facilitation, interference, and scale: the spatial distribution of prey patches affects predation rates in an estuarine benthic community. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 385:127–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ioannou CC, Krause J (2008) Searching for prey: the effect of group size and number. Anim Behav 75:1383–1388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson CA, Giraldeau L-A, Grant JWA (2006) Intensity of interference affects the distribution of house sparrows, Passer domesticus, at food patches. Anim Behav 71:965–970

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keddy PA (2001) Competition, 2nd edn. Kluwer, Norwell

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kendal RL, Coolen I, van Bergen Y, Laland KN (2005) Trade-offs in the adaptive use of social and asocial learning. Adv Stud Behav 35:333–379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kisdi E, Meszéna G (1995) Life histories with lottery competition in a stochastic environment: ESSs which do not prevail. Theor Popul Biol 47:191–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krause J, Ruxton GD (2002) Living in groups. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Krebs CJ (1999) Ecological methodology, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Manly BFJ (1997) Randomization, bootstrap and Monte Carlo methods in biology. Chapman & Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Maynard Smith J (1989) Evolutionary genetics. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Motro U, Shmida A (1995) Near-far search: an evolutionary stable foraging strategy. J Theor Biol 173:15–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakamuta K (1985) Mechanism of the switchover from extensive to area-concentrated search behaviour of the ladybird beetle, Coccinella septempunctata bruckii. J Insect Physiol 31:849–856

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nemiroff L, Despland E (2007) Consistent individual differences in the foraging behaviour of forest tent caterpillars (Malacosoma disstria). Can J Zool 85:1117–1224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nolet BA, Mooij WM (2002) Search paths of swans foraging on spatially autocorrelated tubers. J Anim Ecol 71:451–462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prokopy RJ, Roitberg BD (2001) Joining and avoidance behavior in nonsocial insects. Annu Rev Entomol 45:631–665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ranta E, Rita H, Lindstrom K (1993) Competition versus cooperation: success of individuals foraging alone and in groups. Am Nat 142:42–58

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenzweig ML, Abramsky Z (1997) Two gerbils of the Negev: a long-term investigation of optimal habitat and its consequences. Evol Ecol 11:733–756

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowland JM, Emlen DJ (2009) Two thresholds, three male forms result in facultative male trimorphism in beetles. Science 323:773–776

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ruxton GD (1996) Effects of the spatial and temporal ordering of events on the behaviour of a simple cellular automaton. Ecol Model 84:311–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruxton GD, Hall SJ, Gurney WSC (1995) Attraction toward feeding conspecifics when food patches are exhaustible. Am Nat 145:653–660

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scharf I, Hollender Y, Subach A, Ovadia O (2008) Effect of spatial pattern and microhabitat on pit construction and relocation in Myrmeleon hyalinus (Neuroptera: Myrmeleontidae) larvae. Ecol Entomol 33:337–445

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scharf I, Kotler B, Ovadia O (2009) Consequences of food distribution for optimal searching behavior: an evolutionary model. Evol Ecol 23:245–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schenk D, Bersier LF, Bacher S (2005) An experimental test of the nature of predation: neither prey- nor ratio-dependent. J Anim Ecol 74:86–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitz OJ (2001) From interesting details to dynamical relevance: toward more effective use of empirical insights in theory construction. Oikos 94:39–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinervo B, Lively CM (1996) The rock-paper-scissors game and the evolution of alternative male strategies. Nature 380:240–243

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor J (1976) The advantage of spacing out. J Theor Biol 59:485–490

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tinbergen N, Impekoven M, Franck D (1967) An experiment on spacing-out as a defense against predation. Behaviour 28:307–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Travis JMJ, Palmer SCF (2005) Spatial processes can determine the relationship between prey encounter rate and prey density. Biol Lett 1:136–138

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vahl WK, Van der Meer J, Meijer K, Piersma T, Weissing FJ (2007) Interference competition, the spatial distribution of food and free-living foragers. Anim Behav 74:1493–1503

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Wolf Mooij for his helpful comments on a previous version of the manuscript. I.S. was supported by the Minerva Post-Doctoral Fellowship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Zoology, Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johannes von Müller Weg 6, 55099, Mainz, Germany

    Inon Scharf & Susanne Foitzik

  2. Department of Life Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beersheba, Israel

    Ofer Ovadia

Authors
  1. Inon Scharf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ofer Ovadia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Susanne Foitzik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Inon Scharf.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (PDF 270 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Scharf, I., Ovadia, O. & Foitzik, S. The advantage of alternative tactics of prey and predators depends on the spatial pattern of prey and social interactions among predators. Popul Ecol 54, 187–196 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10144-011-0286-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10144-011-0286-1

Keywords

search

Navigation