Literature DB >> 12856235

The impact of variable stoichiometry on predator-prey interactions: a multinutrient approach.

James P Grover1.   

Abstract

A model for prey and predators is formulated in which three essential nutrients can limit growth of both populations. Prey take up dissolved nutrients, while predators ingest prey, assimilate a fraction of ingested nutrients that depends on their current nutrient status, and recycle the balance. Although individuals are modeled as identical within populations, amounts of nutrients within individuals vary over time in both populations, with reproductive rates increasing with these amounts. Equilibria and their stability depend on nutrient supply conditions. When nutrient supply increases, unusual results can occur, such as a decrease of prey density. This phenomenon occurs if, with increasing nutrient, predators sequester rather than recycle nutrients. Furthermore, despite use of a linear functional response for predators, high nutrient supply can destabilize equilibria. Responses to nutrient supply depend on the balance between assimilation and recycling of nutrients by predators, which differs depending on the identity of the limiting nutrient. Applied to microbial ecosystems, the model predicts that the efficiency of organic carbon mineralization is reduced when supply of mineral nutrients is low and when equilibria are unstable. The extent to which predators recycle or sequester limiting nutrients for their prey is of critical importance for the stability of predator-prey systems and their response to enrichment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12856235     DOI: 10.1086/376577

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am Nat        ISSN: 0003-0147            Impact factor:   3.926


  9 in total

1.  Prey food quality affects flagellate ingestion rates.

Authors:  S Paul Shannon; Thomas H Chrzanowski; James P Grover
Journal:  Microb Ecol       Date:  2006-12-22       Impact factor: 4.552

2.  Ecological stoichiometry of indirect grazer effects on periphyton nutrient content.

Authors:  Helmut Hillebrand; Paul Frost; Antonia Liess
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2007-12-05       Impact factor: 3.225

3.  Monster potential meets potential monster: pros and cons of deploying genetically modified microalgae for biofuels production.

Authors:  K J Flynn; A Mitra; H C Greenwell; J Sui
Journal:  Interface Focus       Date:  2013-02-06       Impact factor: 3.906

4.  Predation risk, stoichiometric plasticity and ecosystem elemental cycling.

Authors:  Shawn J Leroux; Dror Hawlena; Oswald J Schmitz
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2012-08-15       Impact factor: 5.349

5.  Dynamics and nutritional ecology of a nanoflagellate preying upon bacteria.

Authors:  James P Grover; Thomas H Chrzanowski
Journal:  Microb Ecol       Date:  2009-01-30       Impact factor: 4.552

6.  Colimitation of a freshwater herbivore by sterols and polyunsaturated fatty acids.

Authors:  Dominik Martin-Creuzburg; Erik Sperfeld; Alexander Wacker
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2009-02-20       Impact factor: 5.349

7.  Consumer-resource dynamics: quantity, quality, and allocation.

Authors:  Wayne M Getz; Norman Owen-Smith
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-01-20       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Herbivore consumers face different challenges along opposite sides of the stoichiometric knife-edge.

Authors:  Libin Zhou; Steven A J Declerck
Journal:  Ecol Lett       Date:  2019-09-11       Impact factor: 9.492

9.  A new approach to homeostatic regulation: towards a unified view of physiological and ecological concepts.

Authors:  Cédric L Meunier; Arne M Malzahn; Maarten Boersma
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-09-23       Impact factor: 3.240

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.