Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Predicting abundance–body size relationships in functional and taxonomic subsets of food webs

  • Ecosystem Ecology
  • Published:
Oecologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 16 December 2006

Abstract

Abundance–body size relationships are widely observed macroecological patterns in complete food webs and in taxonomically or functionally defined subsets of those webs. Observed abundance–body size relationships have frequently been compared with predictions based on the energetic equivalence hypothesis and, more recently, with predictions based on energy availability to different body size classes. Here, we consider the ways in which working with taxonomically or functionally defined subsets of food webs affected the relationship between the predicted and observed scaling of biomass and body mass in sediment dwelling benthic invertebrate communities at three sites in the North Sea. At each site, the energy available to body size classes in the “whole” community (community defined as all animals of 0.03125–32.0 g shell-free wet weight) and in three subsets was predicted from estimates of trophic level based on nitrogen stable isotope analysis. The observed and predicted scalings of biomass and body size were not significantly different for the whole community, and reflected an increase in energy availability with body size. However, the results for subsets showed that energy availability could increase or decrease with body size, and that individuals in the subsets were likely to be competing with individuals outside the subsets for energy. We conclude that the study of abundance–body mass relationships in functionally or taxonomically defined subsets of food webs is unlikely to provide an adequate test of the energetic equivalence hypothesis or other relationships between energy availability and scaling. To consistently and reliably interpret the results of these tests, it is necessary to know about energy availability as a function of body size both within and outside the subset considered.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Belgrano A, Allen AP, Enquist BJ, Gillooly JF (2002) Allometric scaling of maximum population density: a common rule for marine phytoplankton and terrestrial plants. Ecol Lett 5:611–613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belgrano A, Scharler UM, Dunne J, Ulanowicz RE (2005) Aquatic food webs: an ecosystem approach. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Beukema JJ (1987) Influence of the predatory polychaete Nephtys hombergii on the abundance of other polychaetes. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 40:95–101

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackburn TK, Gaston KJ (1997) A critical assessment of the form of the inter-specific relationship between abundance and body size in animals. J Anim Ecol 66:233–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boudreau PR, Dickie LM (1992) Biomass spectra of aquatic ecosystems in relation to fisheries yield. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 49:1528–1538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown JH, Gillooly JF (2003) Ecological food webs: high-quality data facilitate theoretical unification. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:1467–1468

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brown JH, West GB (eds) (2000) Scaling in biology. Oxford University Press, Oxford

  • Cohen JE, Carpenter SR (2005) Species’ average body mass and numerical abundance in a community food web: statistical questions in estimating the relationship. In: de Ruiter P, Wolters V, Moore JC (eds) Dynamic food webs: multispecies assemblages, ecosystem development, and environmental change. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 137–156

    Google Scholar 

  • Damuth J (1981) Population density and body size in mammals. Nature 290:699–700

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dinmore TA, Jennings S (2004) Predicting abundance–body mass relationships in benthic infaunal communities. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 276:289–292

    Google Scholar 

  • Duplisea DE (2000) Benthic organism biomass size-spectra in the Baltic Sea in relation to the sedimentary environment. Limnol Oceanogr 45:558–568

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Duplisea DE, Jennings S, Warr KJ, Dinmore T (2002) A size-based model of the impacts of bottom trawling on benthic community structure. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 59:1785–1795

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaston KJ, Blackburn TM (2000) Pattern and process in macroecology. Blackwell, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenstreet SPR, Bryant AD, Broekuizen N, Hall SJ, Heath MR (1997) Seasonal variation in the consumption of food by fish in the North Sea and implications for food web dynamics. ICES J Mar Sci 54:243–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jennings S, Mackinson S (2003) Abundance–body mass relationships in size-structured food webs. Ecol Lett 6:971–974

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jennings S, Warr KJ, Mackinson S (2002) Use of size-based production and stable isotope analysis to predict trophic transfer efficiencies and predator–prey body mass ratios in food webs. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 240:11–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Li WKW (2002) Macroecological patterns of phytoplankton in the northwestern North Atlantic Ocean. Nature 419:154–157

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • van der Meer J (2006) Metabolic theories in ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 21:136–140

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Minagawa M, Wada E (1984) Stepwise enrichment of 15N along food chains: further evidence and the relation between 15N and animal age. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 48:1135–1140

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Post DM (2002) Using stable isotopes to estimate trophic position: models, methods and assumptions. Ecology 83:703–718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preston T (1992) The measurement of stable isotope natural abundance variations. Plant Cell Environ 15:1091–1097

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Preston T, Owens NJP (1983) Interfacing an automatic elemental analyser with an isotope ratio mass spectrometer: the potential for fully automated total nitrogen and nitrogen-15 analysis. Analyst 108:971–977

    Google Scholar 

  • Schubert A, Reise K (1986) Predatory effects of Nephtys hombergii on other polychaetes in tidal sediments. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 34:117–124

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwinghamer P (1988) Influence of pollution along a natural gradient and in a mesocosm experiment on biomass size-spectra of benthic communities. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 46:199–206

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ware DM (2000) Aquatic ecosystems: properties and models. In: Harrison PJ, Parsons TR (eds) Fisheries oceanography: an integrative approach to fisheries ecology and management. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 161–194

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Carolyn Barnes, Dave Bromley, Dave Carlin, Nick Dulvy, Chris Firmin, Brian Harley, Jan Hiddink, Chris Leakey, Craig Mills, Michaela Schratzberger, Karema Warr, and the officers and crew of CEFAS Endeavour for their efforts in the field, David Maxwell for statistical advice, Stephanie Cogan for freeze-drying all the samples, C. Limpenny and J. Pipe for sediment analysis, and PDZ Europa and Charles Belanger of Iso-Analytical Limited for conducting the stable isotope analyses. Julia Blanchard and two referees provided helpful comments on the text. The research was funded by UK Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs contract MF0731.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to T. A. D. Maxwell.

Additional information

Communicated by Stefan Scheu

An erratum to this article is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00442-006-0624-8.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Maxwell, T.A.D., Jennings, S. Predicting abundance–body size relationships in functional and taxonomic subsets of food webs. Oecologia 150, 282–290 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-006-0520-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-006-0520-2

Keywords

Navigation