Exploitation Competition and the Evolution of Interference, Cannibalism, and Intraguild Predation in Age/Size-Structured Populations

  • G. A. Polis
Conference paper

Abstract

There is now recognition that a “population” is actually a complex of phenotypes and age groups that vary in their interactions with the environment. For species that grow slowly through a “wide size range” (Polis 1984a), age/size structure is a major feature and determinant of population dynamics. For these species, the type and intensity of intra- and interspecific interactions depend on size. Interactions may range from neutral to predator-prey or competitive as individuals grow and relative size ratios change (e.g., see Fig. 1).

Keywords

Prey Size Intraguild Predation Interference Competition Wide Size Range Large Entity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abrams P (1980) Consumer functional response and competition in consumer-resource systems. Theor Popul Biol 17:80–102.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alstad D (1982) Current speed and filtration rate link caddisfly phylogeny and distributional patterns on a stream gradient. Science 216:533–534.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Askew R (1971) Parasitic insects. American Elsevier, New York.Google Scholar
  4. Beddington JR (1975) Mutual interference between parasites or predators and the effect on searching efficiency. J Anim Ecol 44:331–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bengtsson J (1987) Smaller Zooplankton species are not superior in exploitative competition: a comment on Persson. Am Nat 129:928–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown JH, Maurer BA (1986) Body size, ecological dominance and Cope’s rule. Nature (London) 324:248–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Buss L (1986) Competition and community organization on hard surfaces in the sea. In: Diamond J, Case T (eds) Community Ecology. Harper & Row, New York, pp 517–536.Google Scholar
  8. Calder WA (1984) Size, function, and life history. Harvard Univ Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  9. Carothers J, Jaksic F (1984) Time as a niche difference: the role of interference competition. Oikos 42:403–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Case T, Gilpin ME (1974) Interference competition and niche theory. Proc Natl Acad Sci (USA) 71:3073–3077.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Connell J (1983) On the prevalence and relative importance of interspecific competition: evidence from field experiments. Am Nat 122:661–696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Damuth J (1981) Population density and body size in mammals. Nature (London) 290:699–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fox L (1975) Cannibalism in natural populations. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 6:87–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gauthroux SA (1978) The ecological significance of behavioural dominance. In: Bateson P, Klopper P (eds) Perspectives in ethology. Plenum, New York, pp 17–54.Google Scholar
  15. Gill D (1974) Intrinsic rate of increase, saturation density, and competitive ability. II. The evolution of competitive ability. Am Nat 108:103–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hespenheide H (1973) Ecological inferences form morphological data. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 4:213–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jeffries M, Lawton J (1984) Enemy free space and the structure of ecological communities. Biol J Linn Soc 23:269–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. May R (1975) Some notes on estimating the competition matrix. Ecology 56:737–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Morse D (1974) Niche breadth as a function of social dominance. Am Nat 108:818–830.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Morse D (1980) Behavioral mechanisms in ecology. Harvard Univ Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  21. Nentwig W, Wissel C (1986) A comparison of prey lengths among spiders. Oecologia (Berlin): 595-600.Google Scholar
  22. Oksanen L, Fretwell S, Järvinen O (1979) Interspecific aggression and the limiting similarity of close competitors: the problem of size gaps in some community arrays. Am Nat 114:117–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pacala S, Roughgarden J (1982) Resource partitioning and interspecific competition in two-species insular Anolis lizard communities. Science 217:444–446.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Persson L (1985) Asymmetric competition: are larger animals competitively superior? Am Nat 126:261–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Peters RH (1983) The ecological implications of body size. Univ Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  26. Peters RH, Wassenberg K (1983) The effect of body size on animal abundance. Oecologia (Berlin) 60:89–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Polis GA (1979) Diet and prey phenology of the desert scorpion, Paruroctonus mesaensis Stahnke. J Zool (London) 188:333–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Polis GA (1980) Seasonal and age specific variation in the surface activity of a population of desert scorpions in relation to environmental factors. J Anim Ecol 49:1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Polis GA (1980) The significance of cannibalism on the populations dynamics and surface activity of a natural population of desert scorpions. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 7:25–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Polis GA (1981) The evolution and dynamics of intraspecific predation. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 12:225–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Polis GA (1984a) Age structure component of niche width and intraspecific resource partitioning: can age groups function as ecological species? Am Nat 123:541–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Polis GA (1984b) Intraspecific predation and “infant killing” among invertebrates. In: Hausfater G, Hrdy S (eds) Infanticide: Comparative and Evolutionary Perspectives. Alsinde, New York, pp 87–104.Google Scholar
  33. Polis GA (1988) Trophic and behavioral response of desert scorpions to harsh environmental periods. J Arid Environ 14:123–134.Google Scholar
  34. Polis GA, Farley RD (1979) Characteristics and environmental determinants of natality, growth and maturity in a natural population of the desert scorpion Paruroctonus mesaensis. J Zool (London) 187:517–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Polis GA, Farley RD (1980) Population biology of a desert scorpion: survivorship, microhabitat and the evolution of life history strategy. Ecology 61:620–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Polis GA, McCormick SJ (1982) Arthropods that prey on vertebrates. Biol Rev 57:29–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Polis GA, McCormick SJ (1986a) Patterns of resource use and age structure among species of desert scorpion. J Anim Ecol 55:59–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Polis GA, McCormick SJ (1986b) Scorpions, spiders and solpugids: predation and competition among distantly related taxa. Oecologia (Berlin) 71:111–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Polis GA, McCormick SJ (1987) Intraguild predation and competition among desert scorpions. Ecology 68:332–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Polis GA, Yamashita T: Population energy budget of the desert scorpion Paruroctonus mesaensis. (in preparation).Google Scholar
  41. Polis GA, McReynolds CN, Ford G (1985) Home range geometry of the desert scorpion Paruroctonus mesaensis. Oecologia (Berlin) 67:273–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Polis GA, Myers CA, Holt R (1989) The ecology and evolution of intraguild predation: potential competitors that eat each other. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 20.Google Scholar
  43. Rothstein S (1979) Gene frequencies and the selection for inhibitory traits, with special emphasis on the adaptiveness of territoriality. Am Nat 113:317–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Roughgarden J (1979) Theory of population genetics and evolutionary ecology: an introduction. Macmillan, New York.Google Scholar
  45. Schmidt-Nielsen K (1984) Why is animal size so important? Univ Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  46. Schoener TW (1968) The Anolis lizards of Bimini: resource partitioning in a complex fauna. Ecology 49:704–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schoener TW (1976) Alternatives to Lotka-Volterra Competition: models of intermediate complexity. Theor Popul Biol 10:309–333.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schoener TW (1983) Field experiments on interspecific competition. Am Nat 122:240–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Shorthouse D (1971) Studies on the biology and energetics of the scorpion Urodacus yaschenkoi (Birula 1904). Thesis, Aust Nat Univ, Canberra.Google Scholar
  50. Simberloff D (1982) The status of competition theory in ecology. Ann Zool Fennici 19:241–253.Google Scholar
  51. Stiling P, Strong D (1983) Weak competition among Spartina stem borers, by means of murder. Ecology 64:770–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Strong D (1983) Natural variability and the manifold mechanisms of ecological communities. Am Nat 122:636–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sutherland W, Parker G (1985) Distribution of unequal competitors. In: Sibley R, Smith R (eds) Behavioural ecology: ecological consequences of adaptive behaviour. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 255–273.Google Scholar
  54. Turner M (1979) Diet and feeding phenology of the green lynx spider, Peucetia viridans (Araneae: Oxyopidae). J Arachn 7:149–154.Google Scholar
  55. Vezina A (1985) Empirical relationships between predator and prey size among terrestrial vertebrate predators. Oecologia (Berlin) 67:555–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wilson DS (1975) The adequacy of body size as a niche difference. Am Nat 109:769–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wilson DS (1986) Adaptive indirect effects. In: Diamond J, Case T (eds) Community ecology. Harper & Row, New York, pp 437–446.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. A. Polis
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of BiologyVanderbilt UniversityNashvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations