Review questions

1. Review questions A few members of a population have reached a favourable habitat with few predators and unlimited resources, but their population growth rate is slower than that of the parent population. What is a possible explanation for this situation? • The genetic makeup of these founders may be less favourable than that of the parent population. • The parent population may still be in the exponential part of its growth curve and not yet limited by density-dependent factors. • The Allee effect may be operating; there are not enough population members present for successful reproduction. • a, b, and c may apply. • This scenario would not happen.

2. Review questions As N approaches K for a certain population, which of the following is predicted by the logistic equation? • The growth rate will not change. • The growth rate will approach zero. • The population will show an Allee effect. • The population will increase exponentially. • The carrying capacity of the environment will increase.

3. Review questions In which of the following habitats would you expect to find the largest number of K-selected individuals? • an abandoned field in Saskatchewan • the sand dunes south of Lake Michigan • the rain forests of Brazil • south Florida after a hurricane • a newly emergent volcanic island

4. Review questions Which of the following variables is (are) important in contributing to the rapid growth of human populations? • the high percentage of young people • the average age to first give birth • carrying capacity of the environment • only A and B • A, B, and C

5. Chapter 53 Community Ecology

6. What Is a Community? • A biological community • is an assemblage of populations of various species living close enough for potential interaction

7. Figure 53.1 • The various animals and plants surrounding this watering hole • are all members of a savanna community in southern Africa

8. Concept 53.1: A community’s interactions include competition, predation, herbivory, symbiosis, and disease • Populations are linked by interspecificinteractions (symbiotic, parasitic, competition, disease.) • that affect the survival and reproduction of the species engaged in the interaction

9. Table 53.1 • Interspecific interactions • can have differing effects on the populations involved

10. Competition • Interspecific competition • occurs when species compete for a particular resource that is in short supply • Strong competition can lead to competitiveexclusion Such as, weeds growing in a garden, compete for nutrients and sunlight. • the local elimination of one of the two competing species

11. The Competitive Exclusion Principle • The competitive exclusion principle • states that two species competing for the same limiting resources cannot coexist in the same place

12. Ecological Niches • The ecological niche “job” or “profession” • is the total of an organism’s use of the biotic and abiotic resources in its environment • The niche concept allows restatement of the competitive exclusion principle • two species cannot coexist in a community if their niches are identical

13. EXPERIMENT RESULTS Ecologist Joseph Connell studied two barnacle speciesBalanus balanoides and Chthamalus stellatus that have a stratified distribution on rocks along the coast of Scotland. When Connell removed Balanus from the lower strata, the Chthamalus population spread into that area. High tide High tide Chthamalus Chthamalusrealized niche Balanus Chthamalusfundamental niche Balanusrealized niche Ocean Ocean Low tide Low tide In nature, Balanus fails to survive high on the rocks because it isunable to resist desiccation (drying out) during low tides. Its realized niche is therefore similar to its fundamental niche. In contrast, Chthamalus is usually concentrated on the upper strata of rocks. To determine the fundamental of niche of Chthamalus, Connell removed Balanus from the lower strata. CONCLUSION The spread of Chthamalus when Balanus wasremoved indicates that competitive exclusion makes the realizedniche of Chthamalus much smaller than its fundamental niche. Figure 53.2 Competitive exclusion • However, ecologically similar species can coexist in a community • if there are one or more significant difference in their niches • As a result of competition • a species’ fundamental niche may be different from its realized niche

14. A. insolitususually percheson shady branches. A. ricordii A. insolitus A. distichus perches on fence posts and other sunny surfaces. A. alinigar A. christophei A. distichus A. cybotes A. etheridgei Figure 53.3 Resource Partitioning • Resource partitioning is the differentiation of niches • that enables similar species to coexist in a community

15. G. fortis G. fuliginosa Beak depth Santa María, San Cristóbal 40 Sympatric populations 20 0 Los Hermanos Percentages of individuals in each size class G. fuliginosa, allopatric 40 20 Daphne 0 40 G. fortis, allopatric 20 8 10 12 14 16 0 Beak depth (mm) Figure 53.4 Character Displacement • In character displacement • there is a tendency for characteristics to be more divergent in sympatric (geographically overlapping) populations of two species than in allopatric (distinct) populations of the same two species • Sympatric means geographic overlapping.

16. Predation • Predation refers to an interaction • where one species, the predator, kills and eats the other, the prey • Feeding adaptations of predators include • claws, teeth, fangs, stingers, and poison • Animals also display • a great variety of defensive adaptations

17. Figure 53.5 • Cryptic colouration, or camouflage • makes prey difficult to spot

18. Figure 53.6 • Aposematiccolouration • warns predators to stay away from prey

19. (b) Green parrot snake (a) Hawkmoth larva Figure 53.7a, b • In Batesian mimicry • a palatable or harmless species mimics an unpalatable or harmful model

20. (a) Cuckoo bee (b) Yellow jacket Figure 53.8a, b • In Müllerian mimicry • two or more unpalatable species resemble each other

21. Herbivory • Herbivory, the process in which an herbivore eats parts of a plant • has led to the evolution of plant mechanical and chemical defenses and consequent adaptations by herbivores

22. Parasitism • In parasitism, one organism, the parasite • derives its nourishment from another organism, its host, which is harmed in the process • Parasitism exerts substantial influence on populations • and the structure of communities • Parasitoidism, eggs being laid inside and organism and the larvae slowly eat them.

23. Disease • The effects of disease on populations and communities • is similar to that of parasites • Pathogens, disease-causing agents • are typically bacteria, viruses, or protists

24. Figure 53.9 Mutualism • Mutualistic symbiosis, or mutualism • is an interspecific interaction that benefits both species

25. Figure 53.10 Commensalism • In commensalism • one species benefits and the other is not affected

26. Interspecific Interactions and Adaptation • Evidence for co-evolution • which involves reciprocal genetic change by interacting populations, is scarce • However, generalized adaptation of organisms to other organisms in their environment • is a fundamental feature of life The Australian Chiloglottis orchid attracts male thynnine wasps by mimicking the appearance, the feel and the smell of the female wasp. The males go to the flowers to try and mate, abandoning the females.

27. Concept 53.2: Dominant and keystone species exert strong controls on community structure • In general, a small number of species in a community • exert strong control on that community’s structure

28. Species Diversity • The species diversity of a community • is the variety of different kinds of organisms that make up the community • has two components • Species richness • is the total number of different species in the community • Relative abundance • is the proportion each species represents of the total individuals in the community

29. A B C D Community 1 A: 25% B: 25% C: 25% D: 25% Community 2 Figure 53.11 A: 80% B: 5% C: 5% D: 10% • Two different communities • can have the same species richness, but a different relative abundance • A community with an even species abundance • is more diverse than one in which one or two species are abundant and the remainder rare

30. Trophic Structure • Trophic structure • is the feeding relationships between organisms in a community • is a key factor in community dynamics

31. Quaternary consumers Carnivore Carnivore Tertiary consumers Carnivore Carnivore Secondary consumers Carnivore Carnivore Primary consumers Zooplankton Herbivore Primary producers Plant Phytoplankton Figure 53.12 A terrestrial food chain A marine food chain • Food chains • link the trophic levels from producers to top carnivores

32. Humans Smaller toothed whales Baleen whales Sperm whales Elephant seals Leopard seals Crab-eater seals Squids Fishes Birds Carnivorous plankton Copepods Euphausids (krill) Phyto-plankton Figure 53.13 Food Webs • A food web • is a branching food chain with complex trophic interactions

33. Juvenile striped bass Sea nettle Fish larvae Fish eggs Figure 53.14 Zooplankton • Food webs can be simplified • by isolating a portion of a community that interacts very little with the rest of the community

34. Limits on Food Chain Length • Each food chain in a food web • is usually only a few links long (energy loss if too big). • There are two hypotheses • that attempt to explain food chain length

35. The energetic hypothesis suggests that the length of a food chain • is limited by the inefficiency of energy transfer along the chain • The dynamic stability hypothesis • proposes that long food chains are less stable than short ones

36. 6 6 No. of species 5 5 No. of trophic links 4 4 Number of species Number of trophic links 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 Low Medium High (control) Productivity Figure 53.15 • Most of the available data • support the energetic hypothesis

37. Species with a Large Impact • Certain species have an especially large impact on the structure of entire communities • either because they are highly abundant or because they play a pivotal role in community dynamics

38. Dominant Species • Dominant species • are those species in a community that are most abundant or have the highest biomass • exert powerful control over the occurrence and distribution of other species

39. One hypothesis suggests that dominant species • are most competitive in exploiting limited resources • Another hypothesis for dominant species success • is that they are most successful at avoiding predators

40. Keystone Species • Keystone species • are not necessarily abundant in a community • exert strong control on a community by their ecological roles, or niches

41. With Pisaster (control) 20 15 Number of species present 10 Without Pisaster (experimental) 5 0 1963 ´70 ´71 ´73 ´64 ´65 ´69 ´66 ´72 ´67 ´68 (b) When Pisaster was removed from an intertidal zone, mussels eventually took over the rock face and eliminated most other invertebrates and algae. In a control area from which Pisaster was not removed, there was little change in species diversity. (a) The sea star Pisaster ochraceous feeds preferentially on mussels but will consume other invertebrates. • Field studies of sea stars • exhibit their role as a keystone species in intertidal communities Figure 53.16a,b

42. 100 80 60 Otter number (% max. count) 40 20 0 (a) Sea otter abundance 400 300 Grams per 0.25 m2 200 100 0 (b) Sea urchin biomass 10 8 6 Number per 0.25 m2 4 2 0 1972 1985 1989 1993 1997 Year (c) Total kelp density Food chain after killerwhales started preyingon otters Food chain beforekiller whale involve-ment in chain Figure 53.17 • Observation of sea otter populations and their predation • shows the effect the otters haveon ocean communities

43. Ecosystem “Engineers” (Foundation Species) • Some organisms exert their influence • by causing physical changes in the environment that affect community structure

44. Figure 53.18 • Beaver dams • can transform landscapes on a very large scale

45. 8 6 Number of plant species 4 2 0 With Juncus Without Juncus Salt marsh with Juncus (foreground) Conditions • Some foundation species act as facilitators • that have positive effects on the survival and reproduction of some of the other species in the community Figure 53.19

46. Bottom-Up and Top-Down Controls • The bottom-up model of community organization • proposes a unidirectional influence from lower to higher trophic levels • In this case, the presence or absence of abiotic nutrients • determines community structure, including the abundance of primary producers

47. The top-down model of community organization • proposes that control comes from the trophic level above • In this case, predators control herbivores • which in turn control primary producers

48. 100 75 50 Percentage of herbaceous plant cover 25 0 0 100 200 300 400 Rainfall (mm) Figure 53.20 • Long-term experiment studies have shown • that communities can shift periodically from bottom-up to top-down

49. Restored State Polluted State Fish Rare Abundant Abundant Zooplankton Rare Abundant Algae Rare • Pollution • can affect community dynamics • But through biomanipulation • polluted communities can be restored

50. Concept 53.3: Disturbance influences species diversity and composition • Decades ago, most ecologists favoured the traditional view • that communities are in a state of equilibrium • However, a recent emphasis on change has led to a nonequilibrium model • which describes communities as constantly changing after being buffeted by disturbances