The Evolution of Predator-Prey Interactions: Theory and Evidence

Abstract

Recent theories regarding the evolution of predator-prey interactions is reviewed. This includes theory about the dynamics and stability of both populations and traits, as well as theory predicting how predatory and anti-predator traits should respond to environmental changes. Evolution can stabilize or destabilize interactions; stability is most likely when only the predator evolves, or when traits in one or both species are under strong stabilizing selection. Stability seems least likely when there is coevolution and a bi-directional axis of prey vulnerability. When population cycles exist, adaptation may either increase or decrease the amplitude of those cycles. An increase in the defensive ability of prey is less likely to produce evolutionary countermeasures in its partner than is a comparable increase in attack ability of the predator. Increased productivity may increase or decrease offensive and defensive adaptations. The apparent predominance of evolutionary responses of prey to predators over those of predators to prey is in general accord with equilibrium theory, but theory on stability may be difficult to confirm or refute. Recent work on geographically structured populations promises to advance our understanding of the evolution of predator-prey interactions.

Availability of prey resources drives evolution of predator–prey interaction

“…The specific dynamics and outcome of the evolutionary and ecological process can, however, be sensitive to the underlying assumptions of the models (Hochberg & van Baalen 1998;Thompson 1998;Abrams 2000). Recently, rapid evolution of prey or host defences has been shown to alter the ecological dynamics of the interacting species in laboratory experiments.…”

“…Besides genetic factors, the magnitude of this trade-off is determined by the quality of the environment, that is, how much there are available resources for the prey or host to allocate between different traits (Bohannan et al 2002;Yoshida et al 2004). Theory and experiments (Mole 1994;Hochberg & van Baalen 1998;Bohannan & Lenski 1999;Abrams 2000;Yoshida et al 2004) suggest that when the allocation to defensive traits is costly, the competitive ability of the prey should decrease, especially in the low-resource environments (large magnitude tradeoffs). By contrast, when resources are abundant, prey should be able to invest in both defensive and competitive traits simultaneously because the excess of resources cancels out the fitness cost of defence (small magnitude trade-offs).…”

Bifurcation analysis of piecewise smooth ecological models

“…In such a case, in fact, the coevolution of the two phenotypic traits (one for the prey and one for the predator) turns out to be described, under suitable assumptions, by a Filippov system, which has been mainly analyzed through simulation (Dercole et al, 2006). A complete bifurcation analysis of such a system seems to be possible through the systematic use of the puzzle method and could hopefully give interesting contributions to the theory of prey-predator coevolution (Abrams, 2000). Many other applications are also possible, in particular in the field of renewable resources management.…”

Sete motivações teóricas para o uso da modelagem baseada no indivíduo em ecologia

“…Basta uma investigação inicial na literatura científica para verificar a grande quantidade de hipóteses geradas com a ajuda de tais modelos. Várias concepções importantes sobre a estrutura e evolução de comunidades por meio de interações bióticas e variabilidade ambiental têm sido construídas desta forma, sobre uma mesma base matemática encerrada dentro de uma família de poucas equações (MacArthur & Levins, 1967;Levin, 1970;Levins, 1979;Tilman, 1982;Holt, 1984;Holt et al, 1994;Abrams, 1999;Abrams, 2000).…”