Antelope Conservation 2016
DOI: 10.1002/9781118409572.ch4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Interspecific Resource Competition in Antelopes

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
10
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 83 publications
0
10
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Based on the high dietary overlaps alone, it is tempting to conclude that interspecific competition is unimportant to the insectivorous birds studied, with little impact on either individual fitness or population processes, at least during the chosen study seasons. However, using the framework proposed by Dhondt (2012) and Prins (2016), we instead found evidence for interspecific competition. Coupled with a knowledge of food limitation and intraspecific competition in Jamaica (conditions 1 and 2) and in conjunction with knowledge of resource depletion and population/fitness consequences (conditions 4 and 5), we thus conclude that Redstarts are probably engaged in ongoing interspecific competition in our two non‐breeding sites in addition to the shade coffee habitat studied by Sherry et al .…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 60%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Based on the high dietary overlaps alone, it is tempting to conclude that interspecific competition is unimportant to the insectivorous birds studied, with little impact on either individual fitness or population processes, at least during the chosen study seasons. However, using the framework proposed by Dhondt (2012) and Prins (2016), we instead found evidence for interspecific competition. Coupled with a knowledge of food limitation and intraspecific competition in Jamaica (conditions 1 and 2) and in conjunction with knowledge of resource depletion and population/fitness consequences (conditions 4 and 5), we thus conclude that Redstarts are probably engaged in ongoing interspecific competition in our two non‐breeding sites in addition to the shade coffee habitat studied by Sherry et al .…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 60%
“…Overall, Redstarts overlapped regularly in resource use with a broad range of potential insectivorous avian competitors, and simultaneously showed modest resource specialization. The nature of this resource overlap, coupled with our review of past work on population‐level processes, provides compelling evidence that these interactions are routinely competitive (Dhondt 2012, Prins 2016). Past research has repeatedly shown that Redstarts, along with numerous other warblers, are food‐limited and compete intraspecifically for food, especially in the non‐breeding season.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is also theoretically possible that the species under study do not compete, thus not needing to partition resources. However, the combination of known intraspecific competition and food limitation documented in some of these species supports ongoing interspecific competition (see Dhondt 2012, Prins 2016), as do past studies of competition in many of these warblers (e.g., Greenberg and Ortiz 1994, Sherry et al 2016 b ), necessitating some coexistence mechanism. Additionally, despite selecting a field site and sampling period to maximize niche partitioning and finding few high‐quality prey items in our samples of available prey, it is possible that in different years, under worse conditions, species could overlap less in diet.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 64%
“…Time series and correlations (autocorrelation and cross‐correlation) are among the most adequate and efficient methods to use in case of competition/facilitation studies (Prins, ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%