4.6 Article

Decomposing the effects of ocean environments on predator-prey body-size relationships in food webs

期刊

ROYAL SOCIETY OPEN SCIENCE
卷 5, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rsos.180707

关键词

food web; predator-prey body size ratio; ocean environment; climate change

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science [17H04703]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [17H04703] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Body-size relationships between predators and their prey are important in ecological studies because they reflect the structure and function of food webs. Inspired by studies on the impact of global warming on food webs, the effects of temperature on body-size relationships have been widely investigated; however, the impact of environmental factors on body-size relationShips has not been fully evaluated because climate warming affects various ocean environments. Thus, here, we comprehensively investigated the effects of ocean environments and predator-prey body-size relationships by integrating a large-scale dataset of predator-prey body-size relationships in marine food webs with global oceanographic data. We showed that various oceanographic parameters influence prey size selection. In particular, oxygen concentration, primacy production and salinity, in addition to temperature, significantly alter body-size relationships. Furthermore, we demonstrated that variability (seasonality) of ocean environments significantly affects body-size relationships. The effects of ocean environments on body-size relationships were generally remarkable for small body sizes, but were also significant for large body sizes and were relatively weak for intermediate body sizes, in the cases of temperature seasonality, oxygen concentration and salinity variability. These findings break down the complex effects of ocean environments on body-size relationships, advancing our understanding of how ocean environments influence the structure and functioning of food webs.

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

4.6
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