Summary
Density-dependence provides a causal link between processes acting at different levels of ecological organization. The linkage between density-dependent habitat use, population regulation and community organization is examined on the basis of qualitative and quantitative differences between habitats. These differences are expressed as characteristic shapes on isodars which are lines of equal fitness, and are plotted in density space as lines at every point of which the fitness of individuals in one habitat is equal to that of individuals in another. Isodars can be constructed for single species or modified to include the effects of interacting species. Isodars are easily analyzed by linear regression to differentiate between alternative modes of population regulation and to suggest patterns of community structure. Different isodars are causally related to different kinds of community structure, and suggest the existence of four new forms of community organization; equal, differential, switched and mixed preferences. A preliminary isodar analysis on a common rodent species demonstrates that population regulation depends upon habitat, and that mixed preferences probably organize the rodent community. Habitat-dependent population regulation has farreaching implications to studies of temporal and spatial scale, and to all ecological processes that are density-dependent.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson, P. K. (1970) Ecological structure and gene flow in small mammals.Symp. Zool. Soc. Lond. 26, 295–325.
Brown, J. S. and Rosenzweig, M. L. (1986) Habitat selection in slowly regenerating environments.J. Theor. Biol. 123, 151–71.
Fagen, R. (1987) A generalized habitat matching rule.Evol. Ecol. 1, 5–10.
Fretwell, S. D. and Lucas, H. L. (1970) On territorial behavior and other factors influencing habitat distribution in birds. I. Theoretical development.Acta Biother. 19, 16–36.
Holt, R. D. (1985) Population dynamics in two-patch environments: some anomalous consequences of an optimal habitat distribution.Theor. Pop. Biol. 28, 181–208.
Hurlbert, S. H. (1984) Pseudoreplication and the design of ecological field experiments.Ecol. Monog. 54, 187–211.
Lidicker, W. Z. Jr (1975) The role of dispersal in the demography of small mammals. InSmall Mammals: Their Production and Population Dynamics (F. B. Golley, K. Petrusewicz and L. Ryszkowski, eds), pp. 103–28. Cambridge University Press, London, UK.
Lidicker, W. Z. Jr. (1985) Dispersal. InBiology of New World Microtus (R. H. Tamarin, ed.),pp. 420–54.Amer. Soc. Mammal, Spec. Publ. 8.
MacArthur, R. H. (1972)Geographical Ecology. Harper & Row. NY, USA.
Morris, D. W. (1983). Field tests of competitive interference for space among temperate-zone rodents.Canad. J. Zool. 61, 1517–23.
Morris, D. W. (1984a) Sexual differences in habitat use by small mammals: evolutionary strategy or reproductive constraint?Oecologia 65, 51–7.
Morris, D. W. (1984b) Patterns and scale of habitat use in two temperate-zone small mammal faunas.Canad. J. Zool. 62, 1540–7.
Morris, D. W. (1987a) Ecological scale and habitat use.Ecology 68, 362–9.
Morris, D. W. (1987b) Tests of density-dependent habitat selection in a patchy environment.Ecol. Monog. 57, 267–81.
Morris, D. W. (1987c) Spatial scale and the cost of density-dependent habitat selection.Evol. Ecol. 1, 379–88.
Pimm, S. L. and Rosenzweig, M. L. (1981) Competition and habitat use.Oikos 37, 1–6.
Pimm, S. L., Rosenzweig, M. L. and Mitchell, W. (1985) Competition and food selection: field tests of a theory.Ecology 66, 798–807.
Rosenzweig, M. L. (1974) On the evolution of habitat selection.Pr. 1st Int. Cong. Ecol. 401–4.
Rosenzweig, M. L. (1979) Optimal habitat selection in two-species competitive systems.Fort. Zool. 25, 283–93.
Rosenzweig, M. L. (1981) A theory of habitat selection.Ecology 62, 327–35.
Rosenzweig, M. L. (1985) Some theoretical aspects of habitat selection. In:Habitat Selection in Birds (M. L. Cody, ed.) pp. 517–40. Academic Press, London, UK.
Rosenzweig, M. L. Habitat selection, community organization and small mammal studies. InPatterns in the Structure of Mammalian Communities (D. W. Morris, Z. Abramsky, B. J. Fox and M. R. Willig, eds).Spec. Publ. Mus. Texas Tech Univ. (in press).
Rosenzweig, M. L. and Abramsky, Z. (1985) Detecting density-dependent habitat selection.Amer. Natur. 126, 405–17.
Rosenzweig, M. L. and Abramsky, Z. (1986) Centrifugal community organization.Oikos 46, 339–48.
Schroder, G. D. and Rosenzweig, M. L. (1975) Perturbation analysis of competition and overlap in habitat utilization betweenDipodomys ordii andDipodomys merriami.Oecologia 19, 9–28.
Smith, M. H., Manlove, M. N. and Joule, J. (1978) Spatial and temporal dynamics of the genetic organization of small mammal populations. InPopulations of Small Mammals Under Natural Conditions (D. P. Snyder, ed.), pp. 99–113.Pymat. Lab. Ecol. Spec. Publ. 5.
Sokal, R. R. and Rohlf, F. J. (1981)Biometry, 2nd edn. W. H. Freeman & Co., San Francisco, USA.
Stewart-Oaten, A., Murdoch, W. W. and Parker, K. R. (1986) Environmental impact assessment: ‘pseudoreplication’ in time?Ecology 67, 929–40.
Van Horne, B. (1983) Density as a misleading indicator of habitat quality.J. Wildlife Mgemnt. 47, 893–901.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Morris, D.W. Habitat-dependent population regulation and community structure. Evol Ecol 2, 253–269 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02214286
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02214286