2009
DOI: 10.1007/s12080-009-0062-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Predator–prey systems in streams and rivers

Abstract: Many predator-prey systems are found in environments with a predominantly unidirectional flow such as streams and rivers. Alterations of natural flow regimes (e.g., due to human management or global warming) put biological populations at risk. The aim of this paper is to devise a simple method that links flow speeds (currents) with population retention (persistence) and wash-out (extinction). We consider systems of prey and specialist, as well as generalist, predators, for which we distinguish the following fl… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
33
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 53 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 78 publications
0
33
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A key idea is that populations must have the ability to invade upstream in order to persist (Lutscher et al 2010). Once that necessary condition is met, persistence is determined by the interplay of the size of the habitable river domain, population dispersal characteristics, and ecological interactions (see also Lutscher et al 2006Lutscher et al , 2007Hilker and Lewis 2010;Kolpas and Nisbet 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A key idea is that populations must have the ability to invade upstream in order to persist (Lutscher et al 2010). Once that necessary condition is met, persistence is determined by the interplay of the size of the habitable river domain, population dispersal characteristics, and ecological interactions (see also Lutscher et al 2006Lutscher et al , 2007Hilker and Lewis 2010;Kolpas and Nisbet 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This steady state is incompatible with the zero flux boundary condition, and the predators are gradually washed out of system (Fig. 5;Hilker and Lewis 2010). This occurs via a transition front moving across the domain, so that the prey-only steady state appears to "invade" the co-existence steady state.…”
Section: An Illustrative Examplementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the context of that application, a Dirichlet boundary condition corresponds to a hostile boundary such as a waterfall or a region containing toxic waste water, while a zero-flux condition is of Robin type. A zero Neumann boundary condition is known as a Danckwert boundary condition and corresponds to a long river in which the downstream boundary has little influence (Lutscher et al 2006;Nauman 2008 §9.3.1;Hilker and Lewis 2010). For most equation systems, a convectively unstable steady state is stable on a finite domain with separated boundary conditions, as is the case for (1a), (1b).…”
Section: Absolute and Convective Stabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These could include additional spatial heterogeneity in vital and movement rates as well as the inclusion of species interactions (e.g., competition or predation). Previous single-segment models have found both within-segment spatial variation (Lutscher et al 2006(Lutscher et al , 2007Jin and Lewis 2011;Lam et al 2016) and species interactions (Lutscher et al 2007;Hilker and Lewis 2010) can dramatically alter persistence outcomes. These issues have not been explored as extensively in the framework of branching networks (but see Goldberg et al 2010;Auerbach and Poff 2011).…”
Section: Another Look At CMmentioning
confidence: 99%