4.4 Article

Rabbits protecting birds: Hypopredation and limitations of hyperpredation

期刊

JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL BIOLOGY
卷 297, 期 -, 页码 103-115

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2011.12.005

关键词

Poisoned prey; Biological invasions; Apparent competition; Apparent predation; Qualitative stability

资金

  1. MTG from the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) [BB/E52733911]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Biological invasions often damage island ecosystems. One such damaging consequence of biological invasions is hyperpredation. Hyperpredation is the increase in predation pressure from a generalist predator following the introduction of an alternative prey, typically a consequence of apparent competition between the two prey. Models for this have been devised that demonstrate this effect. However, hyperpredation may not always occur or may not always occur at the same strength. Here, we investigate how different mechanisms affect the magnitude of hyperpredation: (i) saturation of the predator's functional response, (ii) predator interference and (iii) non-predatory competition among predators. We find that all three mechanisms generally reduce hyperpredation. Predator saturation can actually overturn hyperpredation into hypopredation, an increase in native prey, as a result of apparent predation between the two prey. This occurs when the alternative prey is 'poisoned prey', i.e. prey that have a handling time cost greater than the nutritional benefit for the predator. Consuming 'poisoned prey' can result in an increase or decrease in predator density. Conversely, we also identify scenarios in which interference and competition may increase hyperpredation. Based on these insights, we conclude that the invasion of established ecosystems by non-native prey can lead to more diverse consequences than previously thought. Potential control measures should take these effects into account. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据