Predator-prey mass ratio revisited: does preference of relative prey body size depend on individual predator size?

被引:32
|
作者
Tsai, Cheng-Han [1 ,2 ]
Hsieh, Chih-hao [3 ,4 ]
Nakazawa, Takefumi [5 ]
机构
[1] James Cook Univ, AIMS JCU, Australian Inst Marine Sci, Townsville, Qld 4811, Australia
[2] James Cook Univ, Coll Marine & Environm Sci, DB17-063, Townsville, Qld 4811, Australia
[3] Natl Taiwan Univ, Inst Oceanog, 1,Sect 4,Roosevelt Rd, Taipei 106, Taiwan
[4] Natl Taiwan Univ, Inst Ecol & Evolutionary Biol, 1,Sect 4,Roosevelt Rd, Taipei 106, Taiwan
[5] Natl Cheng Kung Univ, Dept Life Sci, 1,Univ Rd, Tainan 701, Taiwan
关键词
allometry; community size spectrum; feeding behaviour; fish predation; individual interaction; long-term data; ontogenetic niche shift; pelagic-benthic coupling; predator-prey body mass ratio; size-dependent predation; FOOD-WEB STRUCTURE; CHEMICAL-COMPOSITION; SPECIES ABUNDANCE; ZOOPLANKTON; CONSTRAINTS; AMPHIPODS; SCALE;
D O I
10.1111/1365-2435.12680
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
1. Quantifying predator-prey body size relationships is key to understanding food webs. Food web models often assume that all individuals of predator species prefer the same relative body size of prey, using a single constant called preferred predator-prey mass ratio (preferred PPMR). In contrast, empirical studies have shown that relative prey body size in diet varies with individual predator size, challenging the food web models based on size-invariant preferred PPMR and their predictions. 2. We point out that this apparent inconsistency arises because empirical PPMR in those previous studies has been measured only through dietary data (i.e. realized PPMR rather than preferred PPMR) without considering the effects of environmental prey availability, suggesting the possibility that preferred PPMR may be in fact independent of individual predator size. 3. Here, we present a new approach to revisit the assumption of size-invariant preferred PPMR in food web models. The approach compares two measures of PPMR calculated from prey compositions in predator diet and environmental prey composition, respectively (i.e. realized PPMR vs. environmental PPMR). The deviations between realized and environmental PPMRs are considered as a proxy of individual variations in relative prey size preference (i.e. preferred PPMR). We apply this idea to long-term dietary data of an omnivorous predatory fish species collected from a lake ecosystem over four decades. 4. Our results showed that the preferred PPMR is independent of individual predator size when the foraging mode (i.e. the major prey type) of the predator is considered while the realized PPMR is size-dependent regardless of the foraging mode, especially when analysed analogously to previous empirical studies. 5. We suggest that the apparent inconsistency between theoretical assumption and empirical observation of PPMR is due to the conceptual and methodological confusion and could be resolved by distinguishing between preferred and realized PPMRs. Further, in contrast to the previous arguments based on realized PPMR, we provide the first empirical support for size-invariant preferred PPMR. Future studies are encouraged to apply our ideas to other species/systems to test the robustness of size-invariant preferred PPMR and to better describe food web models.
引用
收藏
页码:1979 / 1987
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Predator-prey dynamics and the plasticity of predator body size
    DeLong, John P.
    Hanley, Torrance C.
    Vasseur, David A.
    FUNCTIONAL ECOLOGY, 2014, 28 (02) : 487 - 493
  • [2] Energetically relevant predator-prey body mass ratios and their relationship with predator body size
    Reum, Jonathan C. P.
    Holsman, Kirstin K.
    Aydin, Kerim Y.
    Blanchard, Julia L.
    Jennings, Simon
    ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION, 2019, 9 (01): : 201 - 211
  • [3] Predator group size distributions in predator-prey systems
    Wang, Xueting
    Pan, Qiuhui
    Kang, Yibin
    He, Mingfeng
    ECOLOGICAL COMPLEXITY, 2016, 26 : 117 - 127
  • [4] Joint evolution of predator body size and prey-size preference
    Troost, Tineke A.
    Kooi, Bob W.
    Dieckmann, Ulf
    EVOLUTIONARY ECOLOGY, 2008, 22 (06) : 771 - 799
  • [5] Predator-prey systems depend on a prey refuge
    Chivers, W. J.
    Gladstone, W.
    Herbert, R. D.
    Fuller, M. M.
    JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL BIOLOGY, 2014, 360 : 271 - 278
  • [6] Joint evolution of predator body size and prey-size preference
    Tineke A. Troost
    Bob W. Kooi
    Ulf Dieckmann
    Evolutionary Ecology, 2008, 22 : 771 - 799
  • [7] Size and scaling of predator-prey dynamics
    Weitz, JS
    Levin, SA
    ECOLOGY LETTERS, 2006, 9 (05) : 548 - 557
  • [8] The mechanics of predator-prey interactions: First principles of physics predict predator-prey size ratios
    Portalier, Sebastien M. J.
    Fussmann, Gregor F.
    Loreau, Michel
    Cherif, Mehdi
    FUNCTIONAL ECOLOGY, 2019, 33 (02) : 323 - 334
  • [9] Phylogenetic signal in predator-prey body-size relationships
    Naisbit, Russell E.
    Kehrli, Patrik
    Rohr, Rudolf P.
    Bersier, Louis-Felix
    ECOLOGY, 2011, 92 (12) : 2183 - 2189
  • [10] Evolution of body size, range size, and food composition in a predator-prey metapopulation
    Hui, C.
    McGeoch, M. A.
    ECOLOGICAL COMPLEXITY, 2006, 3 (02) : 148 - 159