Effects of spatial structure on predator-prey interactions: A review.

doi:10.13287/j.1001-9332.201702.040

Abstract

Abstract: With increasing human disturbances (e.g., spatial fragmentation), drastic changes have taken place in spatial structure, which further affects the structure and function of ecosystem. The consequences of spatial changes on ecological processes are significantly associated with change in predator-prey interactions. Thus, exploring the relationships between spatial structure andpredator-prey interactions was of significance in understanding the underlying mechanisms of ecological changes in fragmented landscapes. This paper summarized current studies about the effects of typical spatial structures on predator-prey interactions, including the spatial size, spatial shape, spatial orientation, spatial distribution and spatial connectivity. Researches indicated that the stability and continuation of predator-prey system generally decreases with decreasing spatial size and connectivity, and excessive increase in the fragmentation of space, as well as changes in spatial shape and orientation which result in excessive increase in the grazing rate of predators. Effect of complicated spatial structure (coupled from above-mentioned structures) on predator-prey interactions, especially multispecies predator-prey interactions, should be focused on in the future.

DONG Hong-juan, WU Xin-wei, WANG Hong-jiao, XIA Shan-shan, PAN Ying. Effects of spatial structure on predator-prey interactions: A review.[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2017, 28(2): 712-720.

References

[1] Li H, Reynolds JF. On definition and quantification of heterogeneity. Oikos, 1995, 73: 280-284
[2] Li G-T (李桂亭), Zou Y-D (邹运鼎), Zhou X-Z (周夏芝), et al. Effect of mutual interference and heterogeneity on predation of adult Chrysopa septempunctata. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology (应用生态学报), 2002, 13(4): 433-434 (in Chinese)
[3] Zhao QH, Pan Y, Geiffin JN, et al. Contrasting trophic-cascade effects driven by variation in morphology of the perches used by a larval damselfly. Freshwater Biology, 2016, 61: 346-353
[4] Ye S-W (叶少文), Li Z-J (李钟杰), Cao W-X (曹文宣). Species composition, diversity and density of small fishes in two different habitats in Niushan Lake. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology (应用生态学报), 2007, 18(7): 1589-1595 (in Chinese)
[5] Massol F, Gravel D, Mouquet N, et al. Linking community and ecosystem dynamics through spatial ecology. Ecology Letters, 2011, 14: 313-323
[6] Bulleri F, Bruno JF, Benedetti-Cecchi L. Beyond competition: Incorporating positive interactions between species to predict ecosystem invisibility. PLoS Biology, 2008, 6(6): e162
[7] Xi XQ, Eisenhauer N, Sun SC. Parasitoid wasps indirectly suppress seed production by stimulating consumption rates of their seed-feeding hosts. Journal of Animal Ecology, 2015, 84: 1103-1111
[8] Zhao C, Griffin JN, Wu XW, et al. Predatory beetles facilitate plant growth by driving earthworms to lower soil layers. Journal of Animal Ecology, 2013, 82: 749-758
[9] Pan Y, Sun SC. The effect of habitat orientation on gra-zing rate of Ceriodaphnia quadrangular: A microcosm study. Fundamental and Applied Limnology, 2016, 187: 325-333
[10] Tscharntke T, Brandl R. Plant-insect interactions in fragmented landscape. Annual Review of Entomology, 2004, 49: 405-430
[11] Dobramysl U, Täuber UC. Spatial variability enhances species fitness in stochastic predator-prey interactions. Physical Review Letters, 2008, 101: 258102, Doi: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.258102
[12] Wu J-G (邬建国), Li B-L (李百炼), Wu Y-G (伍业钢). Patchinese and patch dynamics.Ⅰ. Concepts and mechanisms. Chinese Journal of Ecology (生态学杂志), 1992, 11(4): 41-45 (in Chinese)
[13] Karsai I, Kampis G. Connected fragmented habitats facilitate stable coexistence dynamics. Ecological Modelling, 2011, 222: 447-455
[14] Cooper JK, Li J, Montagnes DJS. Intermediate fragmentation per se provides stable predator-prey metapopulation dynamics. Ecology Letters, 2012, 15: 856-863
[15] Dodson SI, Ryan S, Tollrian R, et al. Individual swimming behavior of Daphnia: Effects of food, light and container size in four clones. Journal of Plankton Research, 1997, 19: 1537-1552
[16] Fauchald P, Erikstad KE, Skarsfjord H. Scale-depen-dent predator-prey interactions: The hierarchical spatial distribution of seabirds and prey. Ecology, 2000, 81: 773-783
[17] Martínez-Jerónimo F, Rodríguez-Estrada J, Villaseñor-Córdova R. Effect of culture density and volume on Moina micrura (Kurz, 1874) reproduction, and sex ratio in the progeny. Hydrobiologia, 2007, 594: 69-73
[18] Roos AM, McCauley E, Wilson WG. Mobility versus density-limited predator-prey dynamics on different spatial scales. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 1991, 246: 117-122
[19] Gascon C, Travis J. Does the spatial scale of experimentation matter? A text with Tadpoles and Dragonflies. Ecology, 1992, 73: 2237-2243
[20] Benoit-Bird KJ, Au WWL. Prey dynamics affect foraging by a pelagic predator (Stenella longrostrs) over a range of spatial and temporal scales. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 2003, 53: 364-373
[21] Komonen A, Pettilate R, Lindgren M, et al. Forest fragmentation truncates a food chain based on an old-growth forest bracket fungus. Oikos, 2000, 90: 119-126
[22] Turner IM. Species loss in fragments of tropical rain fo-rest: A review of the evidence. Journal of Applied Ecology, 1996, 33: 200-209
[23] Didham RK, Lawton JH, Hammond PM, et al. Trophic structure stability and extinction dynamics of beetles (Coleoptera) in tropical forest fragments. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 1998, 353: 437-451
[24] Cadotte MW, Fukami T. Dispersal, spatial scale, and species diversity in a hierarchically structured experimental landscape. Ecology Letters, 2005, 8: 548-557
[25] Pearman PB. Effects of pond size and consequent predator density on two species of tadpoles. Oecologia, 1995, 102: 1-8
[26] O’Donnell DR, Fey SB, Cottingham KL. Nutrient avai-lability influences kairomone-induced defenses in Scenedesmus acutus (Chlorophyceae). Journal of Plankton Research, 2013, 35: 191-200
[27] Carpenter SR. Microcosm experiments have limited relevance for community and ecosystem ecology. Ecology, 1999, 80: 1085-1088
[28] Srivastava DS, Kolasa J, Bengtsson J, et al. Are natural microcosms useful model systems for ecology? Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 2004, 19: 379-384
[29] Pan Y, Zhang YS, Peng Y, et al. Increases of chamber height and base diameter have contrasting effects on grazing rate of two cladoceran species: Implications for microcosm studies. PLoS One, 2015, 10(8): e0135786
[30] Orrock JL, Danielson BJ, Burns MJ, et al. Spatial eco-logy of predator-prey interactions: Corridors and patch shape influence seed predation. Ecology, 2003, 84: 2589-2599
[31] Stamps JA, Buechner M, Krishnan VV. The effects of edge permeability and habitat geometry on emigration from patches of habitat. The American Naturalist, 1987, 129: 533-552
[32] Clark WR, Bogenschutz TR. Grassland habitat and reproductive success of ring-necked pheasants in northern Iowa. Journal of Field Ornithology, 1999, 70: 380-392
[33] Vetter D, Rücker G, Storch I. A meta-analysis of tropical forest edge effects on bird nest predation risk: Edge effects in avian nest predation. Biological Conservation, 2013, 159: 382-395
[34] Schladow SG, Lee M, Hurzeler BE, et al. Oxygen transfer across the air-water interface by natural convection in lakes. Limnology and Oceanography, 2002, 47: 1394-1404
[35] Larsson P, Lampert W. Experimental evidence of a low-oxygen refuge for large zooplankton. Limnology and Oceanography, 2011, 56: 1682-1688
[36] Christensen BT, Lauridsen TL, Ravn HW, et al. A comparison of feeding efficiency and swimming ability of Daphnia magna exposed to cypermethrin. Aquatic Toxicology, 2005, 73: 210-220
[37] Ashforth D, Yan ND. The interactive effects of calcium concentration and temperature on the survival and reproduction of Daphnia pulex at high and low food concentrations. Limnology and Oceanography, 2008, 53: 420-432
[38] Pan Y, Zhang YS, Sun SC. Phytoplankton-zooplankton dynamics vary with nutrients: A microcosm study with the cyanobacterium Coleofasciculus chthonoplastes and cladoceran Moina micrura. Journal of Plankton Research, 2014, 36: 1323-1332
[39] Morozov A, Li BL. On the importance of dimensionality of space in models of space-mediated population persis-tence. Theoretical Population Biology, 2007, 71: 278-289
[40] Pawar S, Dell AI, Savage VM. Dimensionality of consumer search space drives trophic interaction strengths.Nature, 2012, 486: 485-489
[41] Hollenbeck JP, Ripple WJ. Aspen patch and migratory bird relationships in the northern Yellowstone ecosystem. Landscape Ecology, 2007, 22: 1411-1425
[42] Tanner JE. Patch shape and orientation influences on seagrass epifauna are mediated by dispersal abilities. Oikos, 2003, 100: 517-524
[43] van Kleunen M, Fischer M. Adaptive evolution of plastic foraging responses in a clonal plant. Ecology, 2001, 82: 3309-3319
[44] Gutzwiller KJ, Anderson SH. Interception of moving organisms: Influences of patch shape, size, and orientation on community structure. Landscape Ecology, 1992, 6: 293-303
[45] Stiles JH, Jones RH. Distribution of the red imported fire ant, Solenopsis invicta, in road and powerline habitats. Landscape Ecology, 1998, 13: 335-346
[46] Huffaker CB. Experimental studies on predation: Dispersion factors and predator-prey oscillations. Hilgardia, 1958, 27: 343-383
[47] Levins R. Some demographic and genetic consequences of environmental heterogeneity for biological control. Bulletin of the Entomological Society of America, 1969, 15: 237-240
[48] Caswell H, Cohen JE. Disturbance, interspecific inte-raction and diversity in metapopulations. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 1991, 42: 193-218
[49] Hanski I, Thomas CD. Metapopulation dynamics and conservation: A spatially explicit model applied to butterflies. Biological Conservation, 1994, 68: 167-180
[50] Holyoak M, Lawler SP. Persistence of an extinction-prone predator-prey interaction through metapopulation dynamics. Ecology, 1996, 77: 1867-1879
[51] Cosentino BJ, Schooley RL, Phillips CA. Spatial connectivity moderates the effect of predatory fish on salamander metapopulation dynamics. Ecosphere, 2011, 2: art95
[52] Ellner SP, McCauley E, Kendall BE, et al. Habitat structure and population persistence in an experimental community. Nature, 2001, 412: 538-542
[53] Snyde RE, Chesson P. Local dispersal can facilitate coexistence in the presence of permanent spatial heterogeneity. Ecology Letters, 2003, 6: 301-309
[54] Kareiva P. Habitat fragmentation and stability of predator-prey interactions. Nature, 1987, 326: 388-390
[55] Spielman D, Brook BW, Frankham R. Most species are not driven to extinction before genetic factors impact them. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2004, 101: 15261-15264
[56] Nieminen M, Singer MC, Fortelius W, et al. Experimental confirmation that inbreeding depression increases extinction risk in butterfly populations. The American Naturalist, 2001, 157: 237-244
[57] Higgs AJ, usher MB. Should nature reserves be large or small? Nature, 1980, 285: 568-569
[58] Woodford DJ, Mcintosh AR. Evidence of source-sink metapopulations in a vulnerable native galaxiid fish driven by introduced trout. Ecological Applications, 2010, 20: 967-977
[59] Schtickzelle N, Baguette M. Behavioural responses to habit patch boundaries restrict dispersal and generate emigration-patch area relationships in a fragmented landscapes. Journal of Animal Ecology, 2003, 72: 533-545
[60] Di Giulio M, Holderegger R, Tobias S. Effects of habitat and landscape fragmentation on humans and biodiversity in densely populated landscapes. Journal of Environmental Management, 2009, 90: 2959-2968
[61] Cadotte MW. Dispersal and species diversity: A meta-analysis. The American Naturalist, 2006, 168: 913-924
[62] Shulman RS, Chase JM. Increasing isolation reduces predator: Prey species richness ratios in aquatic food webs. Oikos, 2007, 116: 1581-1587
[63] Pilskog HE, Birkemoe T, Framstad E, et al. Effect of habitat size, quality, and isolation on functional groups of beetles in hollow oaks. Journal of Insect Science, 2016, 16: 1-8, 26
[64] Benedick S, Hill JK, Mustaffa N, et al. Impacts of rain forest fragmentation on butterflies in northern Borneo: Species richness, turnover and the value of small fragments. Journal of Applied Ecology, 2006, 43: 967-977
[65] Du J-G (杜建国), Ye G-Q (叶观琼), Zhou Q-L (周秋麟), et al. Progress and prospects of coastal ecological connectivity studies. Acta Ecologica Sinica (生态学报), 2015, 35(21): 6923-6933 (in Chinese)
[66] Sala OE, Chapin FS Ⅲ, Armesto JJ, et al. Global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100. Science, 2000, 287: 1770-1774
[67] Frank K, Wissel C. A formula for the mean lifetime of metapopulations in heterogeneous landscapes. The Ame-rican Naturalist, 2002, 159: 530-552
[68] Prugh LR, Hodges KE, Sinclair ARE, et al. Effect of habitat area and isolation on fragmented animal populations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2008, 105: 20770-20775
[69] Bull JC, Pickup NJ, Hassell MP, et al. Habitat shape, metapopulations processese and the dynamics of multispecies predator-prey interactions. Journal of Animal Ecology, 2006, 75: 899-907
[70] Cao Y (曹宇), Xiao D-N (肖笃宁), Zhao Y (赵羿), et al. Analysis on landscape ecology literatures in China during recent ten years. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology (应用生态学报), 2001, 12(3): 474-477 (in Chinese)