Prey and predator density‐dependent interactions under different water volumes

Cuthbert, Ross N.; Dalu, Tatenda; Wasserman, Ryan J.; Sentis, Arnaud; Weyl, Olaf L. F.; Froneman, P. William; Callaghan, Amanda; Dick, Jaimie T. A.

doi:10.1002/ece3.7503

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A Type II functional response may be more optimal than a Type III response (where consumption rates are lower than Type II responses at low prey densities) for anthocorids, as biological control agents are able to detect and attack prey more effectively at low densities (Lopes et al 2009 ). Although, Type II functional responses can be destabilizing in comparison to Type III; high consumption rates of prey at low prey densities can lead to prey population destabilization (Dick et al 2014 ; Cuthbert et al 2021 ). However, Type III responses allow a negative density-dependent response of the prey survival with prey population density, stabilizing prey populations and making them less likely to fluctuate (Cuthbert et al 2021 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Having a Type II functional response is more optimal than a Type III for a biological control agent, as natural enemies are still able to detect and attack pests at low densities (Lopes et al 2009 ). However, Type III responses allow a negative density-dependent response of the prey survival with prey population density, compared to type II which may help stabilize prey populations, making them less likely to fluctuate (Cuthbert et al 2021 ). Functional responses are also influenced by multiple biotic and abiotic factors including; life-stage of predator or prey (Farhadi et al 2010 ), sex of predator (Emami et al 2014a ), species of prey (Milonas et al 2011 ), temperature (Englund et al 2011 ) and arena size (Uiterwaal and DeLong 2018 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Functional and Behavioral Responses of the Natural Enemy Anthocoris nemoralis to Cacopsylla pyri, at Different Temperatures

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anthocoris nemoralis is the dominant predator of pear sucker (Cacopsylla pyri) in the UK. Anthocoris nemoralis migrates into orchards in spring or is introduced as a biocontrol agent, reaching peak population levels in July-August, contributing to effective control of summer pear sucker populations. However, due to temperature dependent development and metabolism there are concerns that C. pyri populations or feeding rates may increase due to changing climatic conditions. Thus, how A. nemoralis responds to temperature, impacts its ability as a biocontrol agent. Functional response assays, monitoring attack rate and handling time of A. nemoralis and behavioral assays, using Ethovision tracking software occurred, to assess the impact of temperature on predation. Experiments were conducted at current and future July-August mean temperatures, predicted using RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 (medium and high, representative concentration pathway) emissions scenarios, using 2018 UK Climate Projections (UKCP18). All treatments demonstrated a Type II functional response, with female anthocorids demonstrating shorter handling times and higher attack rates than males. Males showed longer prey handling times at 18 °C compared to 23 °C and more time was spent active at lower temperatures for both sexes. Females did not show significant differences in attack rate or handling time in response to temperature. Overall prey consumption was also not significantly affected by temperature for either sex. This study suggests that anthocorids are likely to remain effective natural enemies under future predicted temperatures, due to non-significant differences in prey consumption.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functional and Behavioral Responses of the Natural Enemy Anthocoris nemoralis to Cacopsylla pyri, at Different Temperatures

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In particular, the size of any habitat (or ecosystem) influences the overall food web structure (McHugh et al, 2015). In this context, alterations of water volumes may have direct implications for predator-prey and predator-predator dynamics through changes in the encounter and capture rates with prey, particularly in ephemeral habitats that experience periodic wet and dry periods (Cuthbert et al, 2021). Reductions in search area associated with lowered water volume may potentially intensify interference among predators in three-dimensional spaces, with implications for predator antagonisms and prey risk.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple predator effects are modified by search area and prey size

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The strength of trophic and non-trophic interactions in predator-prey dynamics may be modified by predator density/diversity and prey size characteristics. In aquatic environments, multi-dimensional scaling of search areas (water depth and surface area) may mediate interactions among predators, with implications for prey risk. Here, we used a comparative functional response (FR) approach to investigate the effects of search area, predator composition and prey size on the strength of trophic and non-trophic interactions in freshwater habitats. A model system comprising two predatory notonectids (Anisops breddini and Anisops sardeus) was examined consuming four larval instar prey of Culex quinquefasciatus mosquitoes at nine different arena sizes, consisting of three crossed levels of surface area and water depth. Type II FRs were most common among predator groups, with 2nd instar prey consumed the most overall. Here, A. sardeus exhibited significantly higher feeding rates as compared to A. breddini, particularly in shallow waters. Non-trophic interactions in conspecific A. breddini and heterospecific pairs were mostly negative, indicating reduced prey risk. Further, predator-predator antagonisms were most pronounced in the heterospecific pairs. Strength of trophic and nontrophic interactions is thus dependent on complex interplays between the characteristics of predatorprey participants in combination with environmental heterogeneities.

show abstract

“…Predator-prey dynamics are central to our understanding of how species interact and are pervasive determinants of community structure [1,2]. However, these dynamics in tropical and subtropical wetlands systems have received little scientific interest [3,4]. In most tropical and subtropical regions, wetland environments are widespread and highly diverse, representing a myriad of systems ranging from permanent to ephemeral [5,6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functional Responses and Additive Multiple Predator Effects of Two Common Wetland Fish

Munyai

Dalu

Wasserman

et al. 2022

Water

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding trophic interactions is essential for the prediction and measurement of structure and function in aquatic environments. Communities in these ecosystems may be shaped by variables such as predator diversity, prey density and emergent multiple predator effects (MPEs), which are likely to influence trophic dynamics. In this study, we examined the effect of key predatory fish in floodplain wetlands, namely Oreochromis mossambicus and Enteromius paludinosus, towards Chironomidae prey, using a comparative functional response (FR) approach. We used single predator species as well as intra- and interspecific paired species to contrast FRs under multiple predator scenarios. Attack rate and handling time estimates from single predator FRs were used to predict multiple predators’ feeding rates, which were compared to observe multiple predators’ feeding rates to quantify potential MPEs. From single fish trials, each species displayed a significant Type II FR, characterized by high feeding rates at low prey densities. Oreochromis mossambicus had a steeper (initial slope, i.e., higher attack rate) and higher (asymptote of curve, i.e., shorter handling time and higher maximum feeding rate) FR, whereas E. paludinosus exhibited lower-magnitude FRs (i.e., lower attack rate, longer handling time and lower feeding rate). In multiple predator scenarios, feeding rates were well-predicted by those of single predators, both in conspecific and interspecific pairs, and thus we did not find evidence for antagonistic or synergistic MPEs. Predator–prey interactions in wetland systems can have significant consequences on the structure and dynamics of ecological communities. In turn, this could have destabilizing effects on resources in tropical wetlands. These results, although experimental, help us understand how trophic interaction among conspecific or interspecific fish species in Austral tropical wetlands might influence their aquatic prey species. This will help us to understand food web dynamics better.

show abstract

Prey and predator density‐dependent interactions under different water volumes

Abstract: Interaction strengths between consumers and resources, such as predators and prey, may be influenced by numerous biotic and abiotic environmental contexts that can challenge predictions of interaction strengths due to emergent effects (Cuthbert, Wasserman,

Cited by 9 publications

References 61 publications

Functional and Behavioral Responses of the Natural Enemy Anthocoris nemoralis to Cacopsylla pyri, at Different Temperatures

Functional and Behavioral Responses of the Natural Enemy Anthocoris nemoralis to Cacopsylla pyri, at Different Temperatures

Multiple predator effects are modified by search area and prey size

Functional Responses and Additive Multiple Predator Effects of Two Common Wetland Fish

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About