Prey abundance and the strength of interference in a foraging shorebird

被引:93
|
作者
Triplet, P
Stillman, RA [1 ]
Goss-Custard, JD
机构
[1] Inst Terr Ecol, Furzebrook Res Stn, Wareham BH20 5AS, Dorset, England
[2] RN Baie de Somme, SMACOPI, F-80100 Abbeville, France
关键词
cockle Cerastoderma edule; foraging behaviour; interference competition; kleptoparasitism; oystercatcher Haematopus ostralegus;
D O I
10.1046/j.1365-2656.1999.00280.x
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Interference is an important component of food competition but is often difficult to detect and measure in natural animal populations. Although interference has been shown to occur between oystercatchers Mytilus edulis L., feeding on mussels Mytilus edulis L., four previous studies have not detected interference between oystercatchers feeding on cockles Cerastoderma edule L. In contrast, this study detected interference between cockle-feeding oystercatchers in the Bale de Somme, France. Prey stealing (kleptoparasitism), one of the main causes of interference between mussel-feeders, also occurred between oystercatchers in the Bale de Somme. The kleptoparasitism rate was related to the natural variation in the food supply, tending to be higher when cockles were rare. Feeding rate was negatively related to competitor density, so providing evidence for interference, but, as in mussel-feeders, only above a threshold density of about 50-100 birds ha(-1). The strength of interference at a fixed competitor density was related to the cockle food supply, usually being greater when cockles were rare. Previous studies probably failed to detect interference between cockle-feeders because competitor densities were too low, or cockles were too abundant, or because they were not conducted during late winter when interference is most intense. The study shows that natural variation in the food supply can influence the strength of interference within an animal population and provides support for those behaviour-based interference models which predict that the strength of interference will be greatest when competitor densities are high and prey scarce.
引用
收藏
页码:254 / 265
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] FORAGING BEHAVIOR OF ANTARCTIC FUR SEALS DURING PERIODS OF CONTRASTING PREY ABUNDANCE
    BOYD, IL
    ARNOULD, JPY
    BARTON, T
    CROXALL, JP
    JOURNAL OF ANIMAL ECOLOGY, 1994, 63 (03) : 703 - 713
  • [22] Effects of variation in the abundance and distribution of prey on the foraging success of central place foragers
    Boyd, Charlotte
    Grunbaum, Daniel
    Hunt, George L., Jr.
    Punt, Andre E.
    Weimerskirch, Henri
    Bertrand, Sophie
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECOLOGY, 2017, 54 (05) : 1362 - 1372
  • [23] Piping Plover Foraging Distribution and Prey Abundance in the Pre-laying Period
    Cohen, Jonathan B.
    Fraser, James D.
    WILSON JOURNAL OF ORNITHOLOGY, 2010, 122 (03): : 578 - 582
  • [24] Effects of variability in prey abundance on reproduction and foraging in chinstrap penguins (Pygoscelis antarctica)
    Croll, D. A.
    Demer, D. A.
    Hewitt, R. P.
    Jansen, J. K.
    Goebel, M. E.
    Tershy, B. R.
    JOURNAL OF ZOOLOGY, 2006, 269 (04) : 506 - 513
  • [25] Influence of prey-food abundance on predator-prey foraging games: a test with little egrets and goldfish
    Vijayan, Sundararaj
    Mitchell, William A.
    Rosenzweig, Michael L.
    Kotler, Burt P.
    Balaban-Feld, Jesse
    Tovelem, Lotan Tamar
    Abramsky, Zvika
    EVOLUTIONARY ECOLOGY RESEARCH, 2018, 19 (04) : 455 - 468
  • [26] Interference competition between wolves and coyotes during variable prey abundance
    Petroelje, Tyler R.
    Kautz, Todd M.
    Beyer, Dean E., Jr.
    Belant, Jerrold L.
    ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION, 2021, 11 (03): : 1413 - 1431
  • [27] Prey Distribution, Physical Habitat Features, and Guild Traits Interact to Produce Contrasting Shorebird Assemblages among Foraging Patches
    VanDusen, Beth M.
    Fegley, Stephen R.
    Peterson, Charles H.
    PLOS ONE, 2012, 7 (12):
  • [28] Shorebird Abundance Estimates in Interior Alaska
    Martin, Ellen C.
    Jochum, Kim A.
    Bagley, Calvin F.
    Doherty, Paul F.
    JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT, 2020, 84 (07): : 1283 - 1295
  • [29] FORAGING RESPONSES OF STILTS (HIMANTOPUS SPP, AVES) TO CHANGES IN BEHAVIOR AND ABUNDANCE OF THEIR RIVERBED PREY
    PIERCE, RJ
    NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF MARINE AND FRESHWATER RESEARCH, 1986, 20 (01) : 17 - 28
  • [30] Foraging patch selection by Snail Kites in response to vegetation structure and prey abundance and availability
    Bennetts, RE
    Darby, PC
    Karunaratne, LB
    WATERBIRDS, 2006, 29 (01) : 88 - 94