4.4 Article

Tritrophic Interactions at a Community Level: Effects of Host Plant Species Quality on Bird Predation of Caterpillars

期刊

AMERICAN NATURALIST
卷 179, 期 3, 页码 363-374

出版社

UNIV CHICAGO PRESS
DOI: 10.1086/664080

关键词

density-dependent predation; herbivory; interaction modification; slow-growth/high-mortality hypothesis; trait-related indirect effect; trophic cascade

资金

  1. Wesleyan University
  2. Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  3. University of California-Irvine Academic Senate Council on Research, Computing, and Libraries

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Effects of plant traits on herbivore-carnivore interactions are well documented in component communities but are not well understood at the level of large, complex communities. We report on a 2-year field experiment testing mechanisms by which variation in food quality among eight temperate forest tree species alters avian suppression of an assemblage of dietary generalist caterpillars. Plant quality and bird effects varied dramatically among tree species; high-quality plants yielded herbivores of 50% greater mass than those on low-quality plants, and bird effects ranged from near 0% to 97% reductions in caterpillar density. We also find evidence for two mechanisms linking host plant quality to bird effects. If caterpillar density was statistically controlled for, birds had relatively strong effects on the herbivores of low-quality plants, as predicted by the slow-growth/high-mortality hypothesis. At the same time, caterpillar density increased with plant quality, and bird effects were density dependent. Consequently, the net effect of birds was strongest on the herbivores of high-quality plants, a dynamic we call the high-performance/high-mortality hypothesis. Host plant quality thus changes highly generalized herbivore-carnivore interactions by two complementary but opposing mechanisms. These results highlight the interrelatedness of plant-herbivore and herbivore-carnivore interactions and thus the importance of a tritrophic perspective.

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