Asymmetric competition between <i>Rana clamitans</i> and <i>Hyla versicolor</i> tadpoles

Smith, Geoffrey R.; Dingfelder, Haley A.; Vaala, David A.

doi:10.1111/j.0030-1299.2004.12841.x

Cited by 26 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…P emerges from eggs larger and earlier than F, which is likely why survival of F was lowered by competition with P while the converse was not true. Asymmetric competition, like that between F and P, is frequently found among anuran species (Morin and Johnson 1988, Parris and Semlitsch 1998, Smith et al 2004) and broadly across different ecological communities (Lawton and Hassell 1981, Connell 1983, Schoener 1983). This strong survival competition on F from P was also a source of heteroscedasticity in our data.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multilevel statistical models and the analysis of experimental data

Behm

Edmonds

Harmon

et al. 2013

Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Data sets from ecological experiments can be difficult to analyze, due to lack of independence of experimental units and complex variance structures. In addition, information of interest may lie in complicated contrasts among treatments, rather than direct output from statistical tests. Here, we present a statistical framework for analyzing data sets containing non-independent experimental units and differences in variance among treatments (heteroscedasticity) and apply this framework to experimental data on interspecific competition among three tadpole species. Our framework involves three steps: (1) use a multilevel regression model to calculate coefficients of treatment effects on response variables; (2) combine coefficients to quantify the strength of competition (the target information of our experiment); and (3) use parametric bootstrapping to calculate significance of competition strengths. We repeated this framework using three multilevel regression models to analyze data at the level of individual tadpoles, at the replicate level, and at the replicate level accounting for heteroscedasticity. Comparing results shows the need to correctly specify the statistical model, with the model that accurately accounts for heteroscedasticity leading to different conclusions from the other two models. This approach gives a single, comprehensive analysis of experimental data that can be used to extract informative biological parameters in a statistically rigorous way.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multilevel statistical models and the analysis of experimental data

Behm

Edmonds

Harmon

et al. 2013

Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…EVects of asymmetric competition has been demonstrated for a number of species pairs from plants (e.g. Wedin and Tilman 1993;Weiner and Damgaard 2006) to invertebrates (Pereira and Do Prado 2005;Yasuda et al 2004;Fowler-Finn and Hebets 2006) and vertebrates such as amphibians (Morin and Johnson 1988;Parris and Semlitsch 1998;Smith et al 2004) and Wsh (Bøhn and Amundsen 2001;Berec et al 2006). Bøhn and Amundsen (2001) claimed that vendace, as a specialized zooplanktivore, reduced zooplankton availability and made this resource unproWtable for whiteWsh.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Asymmetric competition drives lake use of coexisting salmonids

Jönsson¹,

Jönsson²,

Hindar

et al. 2008

Oecologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To what degree are population differences in resource use caused by competition and the occupation of adjacent positions along environmental gradients evidence of competition? Habitat use may be the result of a competitive lottery, or restricted by competition. We tested to what extent population differences in habitat use of two salmonids, cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki) and Dolly Varden charr (Salvelinus malma) were influenced by interspecific competition. We hypothesized that the depth distribution of Dolly Varden charr would be affected by competition from the more littoral and surface-oriented cutthroat trout, and that the depth distribution of cutthroat trout would be little affected by competition from Dolly Varden charr. Sympatric populations of cutthroat trout and Dolly Varden charr were created by reciprocal transfers of previously allopatric populations in two experimental lakes. We found evidence of asymmetric competition, as Dolly Varden charr were displaced from littoral habitats when sympatric with cutthroat trout, whereas cutthroat trout remained unaffected by the presence of Dolly Varden charr. Evolved differences between the species, and differences between experimental lakes, also contributed to population differences in habitat use, but asymmetric competition remained as the main driver of different depth distributions in sympatry.

show abstract

“…Infected individuals of many species may have diVerent behavior, food requirements, feeding rates, or sensitivity to stress (Bedhomme et al 2005). Activity level, which is assumed to be correlated with foraging rate, has been shown to inXuence the outcome of competition in tadpoles (Smith et al 2004). At low food levels, tadpoles appear to increase the proportion of energy invested in Wltering water for food particles, also increasing the level of interference competition (Steinwascher 1979).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Larval amphibian growth and development under varying density: are parasitized individuals poor competitors?

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Population density and infection with parasites often are important factors affecting the growth and development of individuals. How these factors co-occur and interact in nature should have important consequences for individual fitness and higher-order phenomena, such as population dynamics of hosts and their interactions with other species. However, few studies have examined the joint effects of density and parasitism on host growth and development. We examined the co-influences of rearing density and parasitism, by the trematode Echinostoma trivolvis, on the growth and development of larval frogs, Rana (=Lithobates) pipiens. We also examined the potential role of parasite-mediated intraspecific competition by observing how unparasitized individuals performed when housed with other unparasitized tadpoles, versus housing with a combination of unparasitized and parasitized hosts. Mean mass and mean developmental stage were reduced under high rearing densities. The presence of parasitized conspecifics had no significant effect, but there was a significant interaction of density and parasitism presence on host mass, due to the fact that parasitized conspecifics grew poorly at high densities. Unparasitized individuals reared with parasitized and unparasitized conspecifics fared no better than unparasitized individuals reared only with one another. This result indicates that infected hosts compete as much as uninfected hosts for resources, even though infected individuals have reduced mass under high-density conditions. Resource acquisition and resource allocation are different processes, and parasitism, if it only affects the latter, might not have a discernible impact on competitive interactions.

show abstract

Asymmetric competition between Rana clamitans and Hyla versicolor tadpoles

Cited by 26 publications

References 44 publications

Multilevel statistical models and the analysis of experimental data

Multilevel statistical models and the analysis of experimental data

Asymmetric competition drives lake use of coexisting salmonids

Larval amphibian growth and development under varying density: are parasitized individuals poor competitors?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About