23

Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-
Page 2: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

Interspecific Competition I.

Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions:

Mutualism: + +Commensalism: + 0

Amensalism: - 0Predation: + -Competition: - -

Page 3: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

Interspecific Competition

Two (or more) species cause demonstrablereductions in each other’s growth,survival, or fecundity.

Can range from equal effects to apparentamensalism

Page 4: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

A Field Example: Ants and Rodents

Brown and Davidson studied desert rodents,ants, and seeds

Observed that seeds appeared to be limiting

Tested hypothesis that rodents and ants werecompeting for seeds

(Brown and Davidson 1977, Brown 1977)

Page 5: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

Ants and Rodents

(Begon et al. 1996, p. 79)

Page 6: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

Davidson then looked at ants more closely…

Ant species varied widely in size and had two different foraging behaviors

If similar-sized ants coexisted, they forageddifferently

Where many species present, each ant species’mandible size was less variable

Page 7: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

Some general conclusions

2. Competition does not always lead to exclusion of one of the species

3. Coexistence does seem to require differentialuse of resources

4. A species’ morphology or behavior canrespond to competitive pressure

1. Species do not need to be closely relatedin order to compete

Page 8: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

How can coexistence work in thepresence of competition?

Page 9: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

When can competitors coexist?

David Tilman’s experiments with two speciesof planktonic algae

Each species needed silicate and phosphate,and each species had a different thresholdfor each compound

Resource depletion as a method of competitiveexclusion

Page 10: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

Tilman’s experiments

(Tilman 1976, 1982)

Page 11: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

The Ecological Niche

The n-dimensional hypervolume

Fundamental versus realized niche

1950’s : G. E. Hutchinson

Niche is from the species’ point of view

Niche restricted by available habitatfundamental vs realized niche

Conceptual model only!

Page 12: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

Park’s Flour Beetles

(Begon et al. 1996 p. 93)

Page 13: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

Competitive Exclusion Principle

Two species cannot share the identicalniche and coexist

Differentiation can be morphological orbehavioral

Morphological: character displacement

Page 14: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

Example: Darwin’s Finches

(Ricklefs and Miller 2002 p. )

This is an exampleof characterdisplacement

Page 15: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

Coexistence: Resource Partitioning

Resource partitioning: differentiation of therealized niche

Competitive exclusion often an aspect of sameprocess

Niche complementarity: species not differen-tiated along one niche dimension tend tobe separated along some other nichedimension.

Page 16: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

Example: Hermit Crabs

(Vance, 1972. Ecology 53: 1062-1074)

3 species coexisted

Food NOT limiting, butempty shells were!

Two species separated by habitat use, onefrom the other two by shell preference

Shell limitation: interference competition(crab fights!)

Page 17: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

Competitive exclusion in the fieldConnell’s Barnacles:

Chthamalus and Balanus

(Connell 1961)

Page 18: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

A Tale of Two BumblebeesBombus appositus and B. flavfrons

Delphinium barbeyi and Aconitum columbianum

(Inouye 1978)

Page 19: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

Two Kinds of Competition

Interference Competition

Preemtive occupation or taking of aresource (“contest”) e.g., Balanusand Chthamalus

Exploitation Competition

Depleting a resource ahead of thecompetitor (“scramble”) e.g.,B. appositus and B. flavifrons

Page 20: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

Competitive Release

Removal of competitor allows expansionof the realized niche

Experimental: Balanus and Chthamalus

Looking for patterns of occurrencein the field...

Page 21: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

A field test of competitionExamine species distributions: where are they

found in the absence of competitors?

(Begon et al. 1996, p. 96)

Page 22: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

Competition in a Patchy World

Assume two competing species

One always loses

Can coexistence occur?

YES

Under what conditions?

There are at least three...

Page 23: Interspecific Competition I. Possible Outcomes of Interspecific Interactions: Mutualism:+ + Commensalism:+ 0 Amensalism:- 0 Predation:+ - Competition:-

Ungraded writing assignment

List three scenarios in which a specieswould not be excluded by a superior

competitor