4.5 Article

Opposite latitudinal patterns for bird and arthropod predation revealed in experiments with differently colored artificial prey

期刊

ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION
卷 9, 期 24, 页码 14273-14285

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ece3.5862

关键词

arthropod predators; artificial prey; avian predators; biotic interactions; color preference; latitudinal pattern; plasticine models; predation rate

资金

  1. Academy of Finland [311929, 316182]
  2. Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness [PCIN-2016-150]
  3. Community of Madrid [PEJD-2017-PRE/AMB-3669]
  4. Chinese Academy of Sciences [2017XTBG-T01]
  5. West Light Foundation of the Chinese Academy of Sciences
  6. Conselho Nacional de Pesquisa CNPq [3072102016-2]
  7. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior
  8. PELD/CNPq [441703/2016-0]
  9. Consejo Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnologia e Innovacion del Peru [107-2016-FONDECYT-ERANet-LAC]
  10. Linnaeus University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The strength of biotic interactions is generally thought to increase toward the equator, but support for this hypothesis is contradictory. We explored whether predator attacks on artificial prey of eight different colors vary among climates and whether this variation affects the detection of latitudinal patterns in predation. Bird attack rates negatively correlated with model luminance in cold and temperate environments, but not in tropical environments. Bird predation on black and on white (extremes in luminance) models demonstrated different latitudinal patterns, presumably due to differences in prey conspicuousness between habitats with different light regimes. When attacks on models of all colors were combined, arthropod predation decreased, whereas bird predation increased with increasing latitude. We conclude that selection for prey coloration may vary geographically and according to predator identity, and that the importance of different predators may show contrasting patterns, thus weakening the overall latitudinal trend in top-down control of herbivorous insects.

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

4.5
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