Outbreak suppression by predators depends on spatial distribution of prey

Bommarco, Riccardo; Firle, Sascha O.; Ekbom, Barbara

doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.09.012

Cited by 33 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This behavior is indicative of area-restricted search and has been reported for numerous species (e.g., Waage 1978, Lode 2000, Klaassen et al 2006, Pinaud and Weimerskirch 2007. As expected when a predator discovers an aggregation of prey, area-restricted search can result in a greater per capita number of prey killed than when prey are uniformly or randomly distributed (Bell 1991, Godfray 1994, Nachman 2006b, Bommarco et al 2007). In fact, Anagrus females spent 52% more time and parasitized 84% more hosts in the experimental arena when the host distribution was clumped relative to when it was uniform.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

Habitat edges, within‐patch dispersion of hosts, and parasitoid oviposition behavior

Cronin

2009

Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although density-edge effects are commonly reported, we have only scratched the surface in understanding the mechanisms underlying how habitat edges mediate species interactions. Here, I use a combination of field surveys and experiments to explore the linkages between the presence of host-plant edges (Scolochloa festucacea), the within-patch distribution of planthopper eggs (Delphacodes scolochloa), and the oviposition behavior of their egg parasitoids (Anagrus spp.). The field surveys revealed that densities of hosts and parasitoids at the edge were > or = 2.5 times lower than densities in the patch interior and that the effect was independent of patch size. As a consequence of its edge-avoidance behavior, host within-patch dispersion was significantly more aggregated in the presence, as compared to the absence, of an edge. Also, as patch size decreased, the proportion of the patch that was core (i.e., beyond the influence of the edge) decreased, and the degree of host aggregation increased. In a subsequent field experiment, I found that the dispersion of hosts affected Anagrus oviposition behavior only when hosts were present on islands with discrete edges. Under these circumstances, the proportion parasitized and per capita parasitized were 2.3 and 3.4 times higher, respectively, when hosts were clumped as compared to when hosts were uniformly or randomly distributed. Based on a laboratory experiment using small S. festucacea patches, I found that Anagrus had 40% shorter step lengths, spent 52% more time in the patch, and parasitized 84% more hosts when hosts were clumped as compared to uniformly distributed. These results were indicative of area-restricted search by Anagrus, which is an effective foraging strategy when hosts are clumped. This is the first study to demonstrate that predator foraging behavior in response to prey dispersion can be mediated by the presence of a patch edge. Also, because edge-averse behavior is commonly reported in the literature, an underappreciated effect of fragmentation on predator-prey interactions and stability could arise from edge-mediated effects on prey within-patch aggregation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

Habitat edges, within‐patch dispersion of hosts, and parasitoid oviposition behavior

Cronin

2009

Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Perhaps the most thoroughly investigated such case involving aphids is that of cereal fields of northern Europe. An impressive variety of field experimental, observational, and modeling (simulation) results support the conclusion that generalist arthropod predators (especially carabids and spiders) at times can slow significantly the population growth of aphids, particularly early in the growing season (e.g., Edwards et al, 1979;Chiverton 1986Chiverton , 1987Ekbom et al, 1992;Ostman et al, 2001;Lang, 2003;Toft, 2005;Winder et al, 2005;Bommarco et al, 2007). These predators overwinter in large numbers especially at field margins, and repopulate the fields each spring (Petersen, 1999a;Oberg & Ekbom, 2006).…”

Section: Negative Interactions Among Herbivores (Apparent Competition)mentioning

confidence: 67%

Multitrophic interactions among plants, aphids, alternate prey and shared natural enemies - a review

Evans¹

2008

Eur. J. Entomol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Given the generalist tendencies of most predatory arthropods, it is widely thought that their impact on a particular prey species in a given habitat (e.g., an insect pest in a crop) will depend frequently on the local availability of other prey (which for omnivorous predators, can include plant resources, such as fruit and pollen). Thus, from a slightly different perspective, aphids, other herbivorous insects, and plants often may interact indirectly by sharing natural enemies. Such interactions may be either negative or positive, as in the concepts of apparent competition and apparent mutualism, and may therefore have variable impact on the herbivores' host plants as well. I examine the different mechanisms for such indirect effects among herbivores as explored in the experimental literature. An impressive collective effort by numerous researchers recently has expanded considerably our empirical base of support for a variety of hypothesized mechanisms; aphids stand out as the most commonly studied subjects in research on these mechanisms. I therefore focus especially on the recent literature of cases involving aphids interacting indirectly with other prey for generalist predators. My remarks are organized by considering how the availability of alternate prey may alter functional and numerical (aggregative and reproductive) responses of predators to focal prey density. Although the distinctions among these different classes of predator responses and the associated indirect effects are often blurred and scale-dependent, this classification remains useful for organizing the diverse ways in which aphids have been found to participate in indirect interactions among prey as mediated by predators. Collectively, the results of the numerous studies reviewed here suggest that many such indirect interactions likely occur frequently in natural settings, with consequences ultimately for host plant performance.

show abstract

“…Ecological approaches in integrated pest management (IPM) has been attracting considerable attention recently due to its numerous impacts in regard to ecological as well as environmental aspects [32]. By considering prey-predator dynamics at finer scale, both temporally and spatially, it may be possible to design crop systems (agroecosystems) so that insect pest problems and the need for active control measures are minimized [3,7,11]. For instance, ecological theory about stability is relevant to pest control by natural enemies, because this control strategy does not recognize even local extinction of the pests, and hence it attempts to regulate the pest population at low densities by a continuous presence of natural enemies [38].…”

Section: Application In Controlling Pests In Agroecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A two-patch prey-predator model with food-gathering activity

Ghosh

Bhattacharyya

2010

J. Appl. Math. Comput.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In insect ecosystem, the dynamics of prey and predator is regulated by complex interactions between them. Insect pests are spatially aggregated in patches forming a spatial pattern in the environment. An efficient predator dynamically changes its strategies and time for its random search movements to concentrate on higher resource patches based on the benefit of assessment. This food-gathering activity of both prey and predator plays a major role in stabilizing the system by influencing the per unit food consumption. Extending Holling time-budget argument by migration, here we formulate a two patch prey-predator model and show that how several foraging parameters such as handling time, dispersal rate can have important consequences in stability of prey-predator system. Specifically, the ratio between timings that a predator remains mobile in searching and handling their food, is the most important one and simulation on this suggests that the stabilizing effect continues to operate when the dispersal process is modeled more realistically. Thus we conclude that the migration submodel is an important constituent of a spatial predator-prey system. These results are shown to have important implications for possible biological control.

show abstract

Outbreak suppression by predators depends on spatial distribution of prey

Cited by 33 publications

References 51 publications

Habitat edges, within‐patch dispersion of hosts, and parasitoid oviposition behavior

Habitat edges, within‐patch dispersion of hosts, and parasitoid oviposition behavior

Multitrophic interactions among plants, aphids, alternate prey and shared natural enemies - a review

A two-patch prey-predator model with food-gathering activity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About