Interspecific competition is not a major organizing force in many insect communities

Shorrocks, Bryan; Rosewell, Jonathan; Edwards, Kathy; Atkinson, W. D.

doi:10.1038/310310a0

Cited by 139 publications

(100 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We used frequency distribution to understand the association between larval predation and aggregation since aggregated distribution has been frequently employed in studies focusing on spatial patterns in the distribution of invertebrates, mainly parasites and insects (Atkinson & Shorrocks 1984, Shorrocks et al 1984, Kneidel 1985, Ives 1988, Rosewell et al 1990, Poulin 1993, Sréter et al 1994, Umoru 1994.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Larval dispersal and predation in experimental populations of Chrysomya albiceps and Cochliomyia macellaria (Diptera: Calliphoridae)

Andrade

Rocha

Rodrigues

et al. 2002

Mem. Inst. Oswaldo Cruz

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Larval dispersal and predation in experimental populations of Chrysomya albiceps and Cochliomyia macellaria (Diptera: Calliphoridae)

Andrade

Rocha

Rodrigues

et al. 2002

Mem. Inst. Oswaldo Cruz

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Research into Drosophila population ecology (Atkinson 1985;Shorrocks et al 1984) suggests that larval food (rotting fruit) rarely becomes limiting, meaning that competition is unlikely to be a strong limiting factor in natural populations, and that fly populations are more limited by abiotic stresses such as humidity and temperature. This is also supported by the lack of any cline in starvation resistance along these altitudinal gradients, although such clines are observed with latitude (Griffiths et al 2005).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing limits to adaptation along altitudinal gradients in rainforest Drosophila

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Given that evolution can generate rapid and dramatic shifts in the ecological tolerance of a species, what prevents populations adapting to expand into new habitat at the edge of their distributions? Recent population genetic models have focused on the relative costs and benefits of migration between populations. On the one hand, migration may limit adaptive divergence by preventing local populations from matching their local selective optima. On the other hand, migration may also contribute to the genetic variance necessary to allow populations to track these changing optima. Empirical evidence for these contrasting effects of gene flow in natural situations are lacking, largely because it remains difficult to acquire. Here, we develop a way to explore theoretical models by estimating genetic divergence in traits that confer stress resistance along similar ecological gradients in rainforest Drosophila. This approach allows testing for the coupling of clinal divergence with local density, and the effects of genetic variance and the rate of change of the optimum on the response to selection. In support of a swamping effect of migration on phenotypic divergence, our data show no evidence for a cline in stress-related traits where the altitudinal gradient is steep, but significant clinal divergence where it is shallow. However, where clinal divergence is detected, sites showing trait means closer to the presumed local optimum have more genetic variation than sites with trait means distant from their local optimum. This pattern suggests that gene flow also aids a sustained response to selection.

show abstract

“…Predators not only compete with each other, but very fre quently kill and eat other predators that use similar resources and are thus potential competitors (Shorrocks et al, 1984). They either cannibalise conspecifics (Fox, 1975;Kawai, 1978;Mills, 1982;Takahashi, 1987Takahashi, , 1989Agarwala & Dixon, 1991Dong & Polis, 1992), or eat individuals of other species, which is called intraguild predation (IGP -see, e.g., Takahashi, 1989;Evans, 1991;Ferran & Dixon, 1994).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Key life stages of two predatory ladybird species (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae)

Kindlmann¹,

Yasuda²,

Sato³

et al. 2000

Eur. J. Entomol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Development and survival of larvae of two predatory ladybird species, Harmonia axyridis (Pallas) and Coccinella septem punctata L. on hibiscus (Hibiscus syridis L.) trees was followed daily outdoors during four seasons. Data were analysed and stagespecific mortality in a stage-structured model was estimated using Manly's (1997) method. Subsequently, key factor analysis was used to determine the life stages in which the daily mortality was best correlated with the total mortality during larval life. Consis tently with the results from the first two years, the larvae suffered the greatest mortality during the first and fourth instars. The k-values for these two instars were also best correlated with those for the whole larval life, especially in H. axyridis.

show abstract

Interspecific competition is not a major organizing force in many insect communities

Cited by 139 publications

References 12 publications

Larval dispersal and predation in experimental populations of Chrysomya albiceps and Cochliomyia macellaria (Diptera: Calliphoridae)

Larval dispersal and predation in experimental populations of Chrysomya albiceps and Cochliomyia macellaria (Diptera: Calliphoridae)

Testing limits to adaptation along altitudinal gradients in rainforest Drosophila

Key life stages of two predatory ladybird species (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About