Table of Contents
ISRN Ecology
Volume 2011 (2011), Article ID 376083, 8 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.5402/2011/376083
Research Article

Responses to the Foraging/Predation Risk Trade-Off and Individual Variability in Population-Level Fitness Correlates

1Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Chicago, 1101 E 57th Street, Chicago IL 60637, USA
2Pacific Northwest Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 1133 N. Western Avenue, Wenatchee WA 98801, USA

Received 8 March 2011; Accepted 4 April 2011

Academic Editor: P.-A Amundsen

Copyright © 2011 Karl M. Polivka. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. J. S. Brown, “Patch use under predation risk. I. Models and predictions,” Annales Zoologici Fennica, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 301–309, 1992. View at Google Scholar
  2. J. S. Brown, “Vigilance, patch use and habitat selection: foraging under predation risk,” Evolutionary Ecology Research, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 49–71, 1999. View at Google Scholar
  3. E. L. Charnov, “Optimal foraging, the marginal value theorem,” Theoretical Population Biology, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 129–136, 1976. View at Google Scholar
  4. S. L. Lima and L. M. Dill, “Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus,” Canadian Journal of Zoology, vol. 68, no. 4, pp. 619–640, 1990. View at Google Scholar
  5. J. F. Gilliam and D. F. Fraser, “Habitat selection under predation hazard: test of a model with foraging minnows,” Ecology, vol. 68, no. 6, pp. 1856–1862, 1987. View at Google Scholar
  6. J. S. Brown, “Patch use as an indicator of habitat preference, predation risk, and competition,” Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 37–47, 1988. View at Google Scholar
  7. J. S. Brown, B. P. Kotler, and A. Bouskila, “The ecology of fear and the foraging game between owls and gerbils,” Annales Zoologica Fennica, vol. 38, pp. 71–87, 2001. View at Google Scholar
  8. B. P. Kotler, J. S. Brown, and A. Bouskila, “Apprehension and time allocation in gerbils: the effects of predatory risk and energetic state,” Ecology, vol. 85, no. 4, pp. 917–922, 2004. View at Google Scholar
  9. K. M. Polivka, “Use of techniques from foraging theory to quantify the cost of predation for benthic fishes,” Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, vol. 136, no. 6, pp. 1778–1790, 2007. View at Google Scholar
  10. J. S. Brown, B. P. Kotler, and W. A. Mitchell, “Foraging theory, patch use, and the structure of a Negev Desert granivore community,” Ecology, vol. 75, no. 8, pp. 2286–2300, 1994. View at Google Scholar
  11. J. S. Brown and B. P. Kotler, “Hazardous duty pay and the foraging cost of predation,” Ecology Letters, vol. 7, no. 10, pp. 999–1014, 2004. View at Google Scholar
  12. M. Mangel and C. W. Clark, Dynamic Modeling in Behavioral Ecology, Princeton University Press, New Jersey, NJ, USA, 1988.
  13. J. M. McNamara and A. I. Houston, “The value of fat reserves and the tradeoff between starvation and predation,” Acta Biotheoretica, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 37–61, 1990. View at Google Scholar
  14. A. I. Houston, J. M. McNamara, and J. M. C. Hutchinson, “General results concerning the trade-off between gaining energy and avoiding predation,” Philosophical Transactions or the Royal Society of London B, vol. 341, no. 1298, pp. 375–397, 1993. View at Google Scholar
  15. D. M. Hugie and L. M. Dill, “Fish and game: a game theoretic approach to habitat selection by predators and prey,” Journal of Fish Biology, vol. 45, supplement A, pp. 151–169, 1994. View at Google Scholar
  16. J. M. McNamara and A. I. Houston, “State-dependent ideal free distributions,” Evolutionary Ecology, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 298–311, 1990. View at Google Scholar
  17. D. Ludwig and L. L. Rowe, “Life-history strategies for energy gain and predator avoidance under time constraints,” American Naturalist, vol. 135, no. 5, pp. 686–707, 1990. View at Google Scholar
  18. L. Rowe and D. Ludwig, “Size and timing of metamorphosis in complex life cycles: time constraints and variation,” Ecology, vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 413–427, 1991. View at Google Scholar
  19. L. L. Oksanen and P. Lundberg, “Optimization of reproductive effort and foraging time in mammals: the influence of resource level and predation risk,” Evolutionary Ecology, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 45–56, 1995. View at Google Scholar
  20. S. F. Railsback, B. C. Harvey, R. H. Lamberson, D. E. Lee, N. J. Claasen, and S. Yoshisara, “Population-level analysis and validation of an individual-based cutthroat trout model,” Natural Resource Modeling, vol. 15, pp. 83–110, 2002. View at Google Scholar
  21. S. F. Railsback and B. C. Harvey, “Analysis of habitat-selection rules using an individual-based model,” Ecology, vol. 83, no. 7, pp. 1817–1830, 2002. View at Google Scholar
  22. C. W. Clark, “Antipredator behavior and the asset-protection principle,” Behavioral Ecology, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 159–170, 1994. View at Google Scholar
  23. A. R. E. Sinclair and P. Arcese, “Population consequences of predation-sensitive foraging: the Serengeti wildebeest,” Ecology, vol. 76, no. 3, pp. 882–891, 1995. View at Google Scholar
  24. B. P. Kotler, J. S. Brown, S. Mukherjee, O. Berger-Tal, and A. Bouskila, “Moonlight avoidance in gerbils reveals a sophisticated interplay among time allocation, vigilance and state-dependent foraging,” Proceedings of the the Royal Society B, vol. 277, pp. 1469–1474, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  25. S. R. X. Dall, B. P. Kotler, and A. Bouskila, “Attention, apprehension, and gerbils searching in patches,” Annales Zoologici Fennica, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 15–23, 2001. View at Google Scholar
  26. E. Sirot and C. Bernstein, “Time sharing between host searching and food searching in parasitoids: state-dependent optimal strategies,” Behavioral Ecology, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 189–194, 1996. View at Google Scholar
  27. P. Nonacs, “State dependent behavior and the marginal value theorem,” Behavioral Ecology, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 71–83, 2001. View at Google Scholar
  28. K. M. Alofs and K. M. Polivka, “Microhabitat-scale influences of resources and refuge on habitat selection by an estuarine-opportunist fish,” Marine Ecology Progress Series, vol. 271, pp. 297–306, 2004. View at Google Scholar
  29. J. T. Petty and G. D. Grossman, “Giving-up densities and ideal pre-emptive patch use in a predatory benthic stream fish,” Freshwater Biology, vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 780–794, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  30. K. M. Polivka, “Resource-matching across habitats is limited by competition at patch scales in an estuarine-opportunist fish,” Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, vol. 62, no. 4, pp. 913–924, 2005. View at Google Scholar
  31. J. Weiner and S. C. Thomas, “Size variability and competition in plant monocultures,” Oikos, vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 211–222, 1986. View at Google Scholar
  32. S. Sugiyama and F. A. Bazzaz, “Plasticity of seed output in response to soil nutrients and density in abutilon theoprhasti: implications for maintenance of genetic variation,” Oecologia, vol. 112, no. 1, pp. 35–41, 1997. View at Google Scholar
  33. H. M. Wilbur and J. P. Collins, “Ecological aspects of amphibian metamorphosis: non-normal distributions of competitive ability reflect selection for facultative metamorphosis,” Science, vol. 182, pp. 1305–1314, 1973. View at Google Scholar
  34. R. T. Kneib, “Patterns in the utilization of the intertidal salt marsh by larvae and juveniles of Fundulus heteroclitus (Linnaeus) and Fundulus luciae (Baird),” Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, vol. 83, no. 1, pp. 41–51, 1984. View at Google Scholar
  35. S. M. Sogard, “Variability in growth rates of juvenile fishes in different estuarine habitats,” Marine Ecology Progress Series, vol. 85, no. 1-2, pp. 35–53, 1992. View at Google Scholar
  36. K. E. Limburg, M. L. Pace, and D. Fischer, “Consumption, selectivity, and use of zooplankton by larval striped bass and white perch in a seasonally pulsed estuary,” Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, vol. 126, no. 4, pp. 607–621, 1997. View at Google Scholar
  37. M. P. Covi and R. T. Kneib, “Intertidal distribution, population dynamics and production of the amphipod Uhlorchestia spartinophila in a Georgia, USA, salt marsh,” Marine Biology, vol. 121, no. 3, pp. 447–455, 1995. View at Google Scholar
  38. R. T. Kneib, “Predation risk and use of intertidal habitats by young fishes and shrimp,” Ecology, vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 379–386, 1987. View at Google Scholar
  39. R. T. Kneib, “Growth and mortality in successive cohorts of fish larvae within an estuarine nursery,” Marine Ecology Progress Series, vol. 94, no. 2, pp. 115–127, 1993. View at Google Scholar
  40. L. B. Crowder, D. D. Squires, and J. A. Rice, “Nonadditive effects of terrestrial and aquatic predators on juvenile estuarine fish,” Ecology, vol. 78, no. 6, pp. 1796–1804, 1997. View at Google Scholar
  41. D. S. Lee, C. R. Gilbert, C. H. Hocutt, R. E. Jenkins, D. E. McAllister, and J. R. Stauffer Jr., Atlas of North American Freshwater Fishes, North Carolina Stat Museam of Natural History, Raleigh, NC, USA, 1980.
  42. K. M. Polivka, Foraging theory, habitat selection, and the ecology of a guild of benthic estuarine fishes, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill, USA, 2002.
  43. C. A. Pfister, “Some consequences of size variability in juvenile prickly sculpin, Cottus asper,” Environmental Biology of Fishes, vol. 66, no. 4, pp. 383–390, 2003. View at Google Scholar
  44. W. Cresswell, “Diurnal and seasonal mass variation in blackbirds Turdus merula: consequences for mass-dependent predation risk,” Journal of Animal Ecology, vol. 67, no. 1, pp. 78–90, 1998. View at Google Scholar
  45. B. S. Dezfuli, S. Volponi, I. Beltrami, and R. Poulin, “Intra- and interspecific density-dependent effects on growth in helminth parasites of the cormorant Phalocrocorax carbo sinensis,” Parasitology, vol. 124, no. 5, pp. 537–544, 2002. View at Google Scholar
  46. L. L. Sharpe, A. S. Joustra, and M. I. Cherry, “The presence of an avian co-forager reduces vigilance in a cooperative mammal,” Biology Letters, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 475–477, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  47. G. Cowlishaw, M. J. Lawes, M. Lightbody, A. Martin, R. Pettifor, and J. M. Rowcliffe, “A simple rule for the costs of vigilance: empirical evidence from a social forager,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, vol. 271, no. 1534, pp. 27–33, 2004. View at Google Scholar
  48. A. Roux, M. I. Cherry, L. Gygax, and M. B. Manser, “Vigilance behavior and fitness consequences: comparing a solitary foraging and an obligate group-foraging mammal,” Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, vol. 63, no. 8, pp. 1097–1107, 2009. View at Google Scholar
  49. B. D. Wisenden, J. Karst, J. Miller, S. Miller, and L. Fuselier, “Anti-predator behaviour in response to conspecific chemical alarm cues in an esociform fish, Umbra limi (Kirtland 1840),” Environmental Biology of Fishes, vol. 82, no. 1, pp. 85–92, 2008. View at Google Scholar
  50. S. L. Lima and P. A. Bednekoff, “Temporal variation in danger drives antipredator behavior: the predation risk allocation hypothesis,” American Naturalist, vol. 153, no. 6, pp. 649–659, 1999. View at Google Scholar
  51. B. P. Kotler, J. S. Brown, S. R. X. Dall, S. Gresser, D. Ganey, and A. Bouskila, “Foraging games between gerbils and their predators: temporal dynamics of resource depletion and apprehension in gerbils,” Evoutionary Ecology Research, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 495–518, 2002. View at Google Scholar
  52. J. K. Craig, B. J. Burke, L. B. Crowder, and J. A. Rice, “Prey growth and size-dependent predation in juvenile estuarine fishes: experimental and model analyses,” Ecology, vol. 87, no. 9, pp. 2366–2377, 2006. View at Google Scholar
  53. R. R. Sokal and F. J. Rohlf, Biometry, W. H. Freeman, New York, NY, USA, 3rd edition, 1995.