1 / 48

Fall 2010 IB Workshop Series sponsored by IB academic advisors

Fall 2010 IB Workshop Series sponsored by IB academic advisors. Undergraduate Research Tuesday, Oct. 12 4:00-5:00pm 1038 FLB

jeanne
Download Presentation

Fall 2010 IB Workshop Series sponsored by IB academic advisors

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Fall 2010 IB Workshop Seriessponsored by IB academic advisors Undergraduate Research Tuesday, Oct. 12 4:00-5:00pm 1038 FLB Learn why this experience is so valuable, how to go about finding a faculty member with whom to work, and how to use this experience to apply for graduation with distinction. Fellow IB students who have done IB 390 or 490 will share their experiences as well.

  2. Chapter 16 To what extent does competition control species’ presence and abundance?

  3. Objectives I • Definecompetition • Types of competition • Types of resources • D-D regulation via intraspecific competition • Plant responses • Animal responses • Competition added to logistic growth models

  4. Competition: use or defense of a limiting resource that reduces availability to others

  5. Superior competitors can persist at lower resource levels.

  6. Types of competition: • Exploitation vs. interference • Intraspecific vs. interspecific

  7. Competition may occur through exploitation (indirect) of shared resources or (direct) interference(individuals defend resources actively). exploit interfere

  8. Allelopathy: chemical (interference) competition. • This plant distribution is caused by: • H1: Allelopathy • H2: Seed predation by small mammals • No resolution: need experiment considering both simultaneously.

  9. Types of Resources Plants abiotic biotic Animals abiotic biotic

  10. Intraspecific competition + density-dependent population regulation • Negative responses: • Growth is…. • Sexual maturity is…. • Birth rate is … • Death rate is…

  11. Density-dependent regulation (via intraspecific competition) of growth. ***Summarize 2 conclusions. Figure 1

  12. Density-dependent regulation of time to reach sexual maturity. ***Does age or weight determine sexual maturity? Explain. Figure 2

  13. Density-dependent regulation of birth rate Figure 3

  14. Intraspecific competition contributes to density-dependent birth and death rates; hence to regulation of population size. Figure 5

  15. Logistic growth model • dN/dt = rN(K - N)/K) • As N approaches K, intraspecific competition increases. • Population growth slows.

  16. Logistic equation is based on intraspecific competition depressing r, the per capita population growth rate; population size continues to increase until N = K.

  17. Interspecific competition reduces equilibrium level of population below carrying capacity. At equilibrium, each competing species reduces K for the other species.

  18. *** How much is K of sp 1 reduced by one individual of competing sp 2? By all individuals? K1 Figure 6

  19. Lotka-Volterra addition of interspecificcompetition to logistic equation: • (dN/dt) = rN[(K-N)/K] becomes: • (dN1/dt) = r1N1[(K1 -N1 - 1,2N2)/K1] • 1,2 = competition coefficient • effect of each individual of sp 2 on sp 1 • effect of sp 2 on sp 1’s growth rate • Similarly, for species 2: • (dN2/dt) = r2 N2[(K2 -N2 - 2,1N1)/K2]

  20. ***What is  (competition coefficient) for the effect of 1 ind. of sp. 2 (N2) on sp. 1 (N1) or equivalence of sp. 2 for sp. 1? K1 Figure 7

  21. Objectives II • Niche concepts • Interspecific competition • ‘Ghost of competition past’: how deduce today whether competition in past? • Classic experiments • Competitive exclusion hypothesis • Field experimental studies: how document that competition is occurring?

  22. Niche: • Ecological role of species in community • Ranges of conditions and resource qualities within which the species persists • Often conceived as a multi-dimensional space (hypervolume)

  23. From 1 to n niche axes --> hypervolume of niche space

  24. Niche metrics

  25. Intraspecific competition: creates selective pressure for broader resource use. w/o Frequency within pop. • Interspecific competition: select for • narrower resource use; pack in more sp. with Food size utilized with w/o Frequency within pop. Food size utilized

  26. Niche breadth decreases with interspecific competition.. Without competing sp. With competing sp..

  27. Niche differences among congeneric trees. Note differences on different rock types.

  28. ‘Ghost of competition past’:What evidence is used to deduce that interspecific competition has occurred in the past? 1 2 3 4 5

  29. 1) Niche separation viaresource partitioning among related species.

  30. 1) Niche separation via resource partitioning

  31. 2) Habitat shift: Use of habitat often changes depending on presence or absence of closely related species.Expand habitat when other species absent. Figure 10

  32. 3) Character displacement when in sympatry.

  33. 3) Character displacement: Morphological traits and food selection of species shift depending on presence or absence of closely related species.

  34. 4. Competitive Exclusion Hypothesis: 2 species can’t coexist on the same limiting resource. Figure 12

  35. Two species can coexist if they are limited by different resources. Figure 12A

  36. 5) Competitive release: Densities of organisms often increase when densities of competing species are reduced. Figure 14

  37. Observation: One predator feeds on many competing prey species. Does it control diversity? • Hypothesis: • Prediction: • If prey species drop from 15 to 8 when starfish removed, • What is Conclusion? • What is a keystone predator? Figure 15

  38. Field Experiments: How can we demonstrate competition is occurring? The following slides are sample test questions for you to work on at home as ICA 5. See website to print worksheet to use. Do ONLY questions 3 + 4. Worksheet is due on Thursday, October 14 at lecture.

  39. Question 1: Buttercups The figure on the next slide illustrates the distribution of two species of buttercups along a transect across ridge (high land) and furrow (low valley) grassland. • In one sentence summarize the results. • Provide two alternative hypotheses (If…then) for the observed pattern. • Draw or describe one complete experiment that would test both hypotheses. • What specific results from the experiment would provide support for your hypothesis 1 above?

  40. Figure for preceding ? Draw the contrasting curves for species 1 and 2. Sp 1 peaks on furrow (F) Sp 2 peaks on ridge (R ) F R F R F Distance along transect (m) No. of plants

  41. Question 2. Observation: zones of sp. B + C do not overlap. What are two alternative hypotheses / predictions?Experimental design? C B

  42. What explains zonation of barnacles? • Results: • Together: Only B survives with B + C in B zone. • Only C survives with B + C in C zone. • Alone: C grows in B but B can’t grow in C zone. • What are two conclusions?

  43. Question 3: Galium sp. + Common garden experiment to study interspecific competition: • Observation: • 2 closely related sp. grow in different habitats or soils. • What are 2 altenative hypotheses • H1: • H2 : • Describe the experimental design. • What are 2 key results? • What is main conclusion? • Is competition symmetric between the two species?

  44. Question 4. Desmodium sp. X 2 • What are the two key questions being addressed by this experiment? • Summarize two key results. • What is the main conclusion? • Which species is the better • competitor? • Is competition symmetric between the two species?

  45. Question 5: 2 grassesObservation: An area of serpentine rock is adjacent to an area of granite rock. Grass 1 on granite soil is replaced abruptly by Grass 2 on serpentine soil. • What are two alternative hypotheses that explain their distribution? • Question 1: Are the two grasses restricted to their respective substrates by soil factors? • ***Design an experiment to answer the ?

  46. Results: • Grass 1 grows well on granitic soil but fails to grow on serpentine soils. • Grass 2 grows equally well on serpentine and granitic soils. • ***What is the main conclusion for grass 1? For grass 2?

  47. ***Design two experiments to determine whether competition limits the distribution of these two grasses.

  48. Results: • Experiment 1 • 1:1 mix on serpentine, Grass 1 dies, Grass 2 thrives. • 1:1 mix on granite, Grass 2 dies, Grass 1 thrives. • Experiment 2 • When Grass 2 is cleared from serpentine, Grass 1 does not spread into area. • When Grass 1 is cleared from granite, Grass 2 spreads into area. • Is competition symmetric or asymmetric? • What is the main conclusion about grass 1’s competitive ability? Its tolerance of serpentine soil stress? • What may be a general principle relating to competitive ability vs. tolerance of stressful conditions?

More Related