Quantification of Competition among Coexisting Heteromyids in the Southwest

Lemen, Cliff A.; Freeman, Patricia W.

doi:10.2307/3670590

Cited by 18 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…5B). In reality competition in communities of American desert rodents has been confirmed experimentally (Munger and Brown 1981, Lemen and Freeman 1983, 1987etc. ).…”

Section: Sm Ss Pf Pn Pp Dm Dn Na Ot Pe Pmmentioning

confidence: 87%

Morpho-ecological structure of desert rodent communities in Central Asia and southwestern North America: a multivariate approach

Rogovin

Surov

1990

Acta Theriol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. 1990. Morpho-ecological structure of desert rodent communities in Central Asia and southwestern North America: a multivariate approach. Acta theriol. 35: 225-239.The principal components analysis and the cluster analysis were used to study the morpho-ecological organization of four desert rodent communities from Mongolia (Trans--Altai Gobi and Gobi-Altai) and Mexico (Central Chihuahua and Sonora). Twenty characters of external morphology of 41 species (representatives of 54 populations) were put into analysis. Results demonstrate a relatively low level of convergence between Mongolian and Mexican species. Rodent species of Mongolian communities occupy a bigger volume of the factorial space than rodent species of Mexican communities, although the number of species in both types of communities is similar. The comparison of Euclidean distances to the nearest neighbour and their coefficients of variation in real groups of coexisting species (at the level of habitat) and in hypothetical groups formed by random combination of species points to the pattern of regularity in species packing. At the same time there are differences in species distribution in morphological space of Mongolian and Mexican communities. The significant positive correlation of Euclidean distances in morphological and in ecological space (distances between centers of spatial niches) was shown in the community of Mongolian rodents. There is no such correlation in the Mexican rodent community. Predators and environmental conditions could be expected influencing community formation in deserts of Central Asia whereas in deserts of North America the role of interspecific competition is more probable.

show abstract

“…5B). In reality competition in communities of American desert rodents has been confirmed experimentally (Munger and Brown 1981, Lemen and Freeman 1983, 1987etc. ).…”

Section: Sm Ss Pf Pn Pp Dm Dn Na Ot Pe Pmmentioning

confidence: 87%

Morpho-ecological structure of desert rodent communities in Central Asia and southwestern North America: a multivariate approach

Rogovin

Surov

1990

Acta Theriol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, coexisting species appear to compete; the removal of one or several species increases the densities of the remaining species (22,68,85). Second, it is easy to identify at least one of the limiting resources that leads to competition; desert rodents harvest and consume a large fraction (up to 86.5%; 32) of seed productivity, and rodent diversities are affected by plant productivity (2, 3,5,15,16,88) and the availability of seeds (31, 107,112,113,147).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Biogeographical theories (17) have moti vated investigations into community structure with respect to body size (13,15,16,127) and species co-occurrence patterns (17,19). The community matrix approach (73) has encouraged both direct-via removal experiments (6,22,68,85,123)-and indirect-via census data (43, 118) measurements of species' interaction coefficients. Finally, theories of forag ing behavior (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental Heterogeneity and the Coexistence of Desert Rodents

Kotler

Brown²

1988

Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst.

331

165

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Sympatric species of granivores often differ little in diet and habitat use. These communities are attractive systems for studying resource competition because: (1) species-removal experiments suggest that coexisting species compete (Munger and Brown 1981, Courtney 1983, Lemen and Freeman 1983, Brown and Munger 1985 and (2) the positive effect of seed availability on rodent densities (Reynolds 1958, Chew and Butterworth 1964, Reichman and Van de Graaff 1973, Whitford 1976, Petryszyn 1982, Brown and Munger 1985 indicates that seeds are a primary and limiting resource.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Desert Rodent Community Structure: A Test of Four Mechanisms of Coexistence

Brown¹

1989

Ecological Monographs

247

192

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Four mechanisms of coexistence are considered that may contribute to the diversity of desert granivorous rodent communities. In the first, bush/open microhabitat selection, coexistence is possible if there is a trade-off between foraging efficiency in the bush and open microhabitats. In the second, temporal variation in resource abundances, coexistence is possible if there is a trade-off between foraging efficiency and maintenance efficiency. The first species can forage profitably on low resource abundances while the second uses dormancy to travel inexpensively in time between periods of high resource abundances. In the third, spatial variation in resource abundance, coexistence is possible if there is a trade-off between foraging efficiency and the cost of travel. The first species forages patches to a lower giving-up density, (the density of resource at which a forager ceases foraging), while the second can inexpensively travel between patches with high resource abundances. In the fourth, seasonal rotation in foraging efficiencies, coexistence is possible if there is a trade-off between the costs of foraging during different seasons. The species that is the more efficient forager changes seasonally.The first mechanism of coexistence has received much empirical attention and support. The other three have not previously been considered with desert rodents. In a community of four granivorous rodent species, I used artificial seed patches to measure speciesand habitat-specific foraging efficiencies and live-trapping to measure population sizes and mean distances between recaptures. Of the four, the fourth mechanism of coexistence best explained the presence of Perognathus amp/us, Dipodomys merriami, and Spermophi/us tereticaudus in the community. Each species enjoyed a period of the year during which it was the most efficient forager. Furthermore, the annual population densities of these three species fluctuated out of phase. Seasonal changes in species-specific predation risks and body size-dependent metabolic costs may have accounted for these results. The third mechanism of coexistence best explained the presence of Ammospermophi/us harrisii in the community. This species preferred to forage a large number of widely spaced patches to a high giving-up density rather than forage a few patches to a low giving-up density.

show abstract

Quantification of Competition among Coexisting Heteromyids in the Southwest

Cited by 18 publications

References 11 publications

Morpho-ecological structure of desert rodent communities in Central Asia and southwestern North America: a multivariate approach

Morpho-ecological structure of desert rodent communities in Central Asia and southwestern North America: a multivariate approach

Environmental Heterogeneity and the Coexistence of Desert Rodents

Desert Rodent Community Structure: A Test of Four Mechanisms of Coexistence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About