Eight Reasons Why Optimal Foraging Theory Is a Complete Waste of Time

Pierce, Graham J.; Ollason, J. G.

doi:10.2307/3565560

Cited by 309 publications

(117 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(14 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

111

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Fitness differences, however, can be measured only under natural field conditions diat are usually far too complex to allow predictions about specific dieoretical optima widi which die observed foraging patterns can dien be compared. This dilemma has led some authors to doubt die usefulness of optimal foraging notions in field studies (e.g., Zach and Smith, 1981), to criticize die lack of alternative working hypotheses (Ward, 1992(Ward, , 1993, and even to consider die whole optimal foraging dieory a "complete waste of time" (Pierce and OUason, 1987 In diis study, we present evidence for such a link in die water pipit (Anthus sp. spinoletta), a ca.…”

mentioning

confidence: 80%

Relationships between food resources, foraging patterns, and reproductive success in the water pipit, Anthus sp. spinoletta

Frey-Roos¹,

Brodmann²,

Reyer³

1995

Behavioral Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A base but rarely tested assumption in optimal foraging theory is that positive relationships exist between the foraging pattern of an animal, its short-term benefits in feeding, and its long-term fitness. We present evidence for these relationships for a central place foraging situation. We studied the foraging behavior of adult water pipits (Anthus sp. spmoletui) feeding nestlings in an Alpine habitat near Davos, Switzerland, with the following results: (1) searching effort decreases with increasing distance from the nest, (2) the amount of prey and the proportion of large items brought to the nest increases widi increasing foraging distance, (3) water pipits do not forage according to habitat availability, but prefer vegetation types with the highest food density (mainly grass and herbs) and avoid those with the lowest, and (4) this selectivity is only expressed when die birds forage more than 50 m from the nest, i.e., usually outside the territory. Among die several potential interpretations of diese results, the most parsimonious is that foraging decisions are based on profitability, i.e., on the net energy gain per time unit. Additionally, we found diat food conditions translate into fitness: die number of fledglings per nest is related positively to the average prey biomass at the foraging place and negatively to die average distance between die foraging place and die nest. Maximum economic distances, which were predicted from diis food-fitness relationship, agreed well widi die actual foraging distances observed. This suggests a close connection between foraging decisions and fitness. In addition to die dieoretical issues, some conservation issues are also briefly discussed. Key words: central-place foraging, fitness, habitat use, optimal foraging, reproduction, water pipit [Behav Ecol 6:287-295 (1995)]A mong die most important determinants of an animal's il fitness is die amount and quality of food available during reproduction (reviewed by Martin, 1987). Evidence is particularly strong for altricial birds, in which increased food supply has been found to improve bodi current and future reproductive success. In terms of current success, better food conditions can advance laying date; increase dutch and egg sizes; and improve hatching, growdi, and survival rates of die young. In terms of future success, food stress can reduce die residual reproductive value of parents by lowering their survival or by impairing their subsequent production of offspring (reviewed by Nur, 1990; Partridge and Harvey, 1988; Reznik, 1985; Stearns, 1992).Widi food having such a strong influence on fitness related traits, we can assume that selection has produced phenotypes which forage in a way that guarantees die best achievable balance between costs and benefits. This idea is at die basis of die large number of dieoretical and empirical studies on "optimal foraging" diat have been published over die last 30 or so years (for reviews see diese are handicapped by die following problem: die observed foraging behaviors only show di...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 80%

Relationships between food resources, foraging patterns, and reproductive success in the water pipit, Anthus sp. spinoletta

Frey-Roos¹,

Brodmann²,

Reyer³

1995

Behavioral Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is not difficult to see that behavioural components can in principle be optimized, because the individual has, to some extent, the freedom to choose. Even in this situation, however, there are doubts that this actually leads to profound insight [710]. Behavioural and physiological components are closely linked, and the individual has less freedom to choose from physiological options.…”

Section: Conservation Lawsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamic Energy and Mass Budgets in Biological Systems

Kooijman

2000

793

1,202

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

second editionDynamic Energy Budget theory unifies the commonalities between organisms as prescribed by the implications of energetics, which link different levels of biological organization (cells, organisms and populations). The theory presents simple mechanistic rules that describe the uptake and use of energy and nutrients and the consequences for physiological organization throughout an organism's life cycle, including the relationships between energetics and aging and the effects of toxicants. In this new edition, the theory is broadened to encompass the fluxes of both energy and mass. All living organisms are now covered in a single quantitative framework, the predictions of which are tested against a wide variety of experimental results at the various levels of biological organization. The theory explains many general observations, such as the body size scaling relationships of certain physiological traits, and provides a theoretical basis for the widely used method of indirect calorimetry. In each case, the theory is developed in elementary mathematical terms, but a more detailed discussion of the methodological aspects of mathematical modelling is also included, making the book suitable for biologists and mathematicians with a broad interest in both fundamental and applied quantitative problems in biology.Bas Kooijman is Professor of Applied Theoretical Biology at the Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam and is also head of the University's Department of Theoretical Biology. His research focuses on mathematical biology, in particular ecotoxicology which provided the framework for the original version of his Dynamic Energy Budget theory published in 1993 (Dynamic Energy Budgets in Biological Systems -Theory and Applications in Ecotoxicology). From the first edition:"This book is an excellent scientific product that informs and forces contemplation of issues relating to population and community ecology. The author has made a complex subject coherent." Thomas G. Hallam, Bulletin of Mathematical Biology "... a very useful and general tool to select more ecologically sound process equations and parameters in ecological models." Sven Erik Jørgensen, Ecological Modelling "The author has made a significant contribution to the problem of modelling the dynamics of biological populations at the level of the individual by synthesizing this very complicated subject into a relatively short list of general assumptions and putting the energetics of sub-models for vital rates on a solid basis." Jim Cushing, Mathematical Biosciences "The family of idealized models offered in this book is capable of playing a role analogous to that of Lotka-Volterra models in population dynamics ... I am confident that any model(s) capable of occupying this niche will be strongly influenced by the ideas in this book." Roger Nisbet, Ecology 9 LIVING TOGETHER Interaction between organisms: The spectrum from competition to preypredator systems. Evaluation of the consequences of the DEB model for population dynamics, food chains, and communities....

show abstract

“…Weighing these variables in terms of their contribution is possible, but such actions also require that interaction effects are taken into account. Additionally, such weighting is somewhat speculative, and it means we are moving into a muddy domain where we tweak our equations post-hoc until we force them to make sense, rendering anything optimal (Pierce & Ollason, 1987). It is therefore incredibly difficult to talk about optimal choices, as the actual choice is context-specific for any given set of parameters.…”

Section: The Problematic Inter-trial-intervalmentioning

confidence: 99%