| Literature DB >> 21138513 |
E Vercken1, A M Kramer, P C Tobin, J M Drake.
Abstract
Allee effects are important dynamical mechanisms in small-density populations in which per capita population growth rate increases with density. When positive density dependence is sufficiently severe (a 'strong' Allee effect), a critical density arises below which populations do not persist. For spatially distributed populations subject to dispersal, theory predicts that the occupied area also exhibits a critical threshold for population persistence, but this result has not been confirmed in nature. We tested this prediction in patterns of population persistence across the invasion front of the European gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar) in the United States in data collected between 1996 and 2008. Our analysis consistently provided evidence for effects of both population area and density on persistence, as predicted by the general theory, and confirmed here using a mechanistic model developed for the gypsy moth system. We believe this study to be the first empirical documentation of critical patch size induced by an Allee effect.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2010 PMID: 21138513 PMCID: PMC3064761 DOI: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01569.x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ecol Lett ISSN: 1461-023X Impact factor: 9.492
Figure 1Map of the distribution of pheromone-baited traps along the gypsy moth invasion front, 2003. (a) Variation in intertrap distance across the transition zone between established and unestablished areas. (b) Construction of super-polygons: empty traps (white circles) are not included in polygons; seed polygons that share a common edge are merged into a super-polygon.
Results of generalized additive model of persistence
| Coefficients | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year | Log10 (area) | Density | Interaction | e.d.f. of smooth parameter | % deviance explained |
| 1996 | 1.42 | 0.50 | 0.28 | 32.2 | 39.7 |
| 1997 | 0.97 | 3.02 | −1.04 | 20.0 | 28.6 |
| 1998 | 1.39 | 1.57 | −0.13 | 22.1 | 47.8 |
| 1999 | 1.61 | 2.19 | −0.64 | 40.7 | 45.8 |
| 2000 | 2.43 | 4.86 | −2.35 | 36.3 | 38.7 |
| 2001 | 2.59 | 5.00 | −2.67 | 24.0 | 32.3 |
| 2002 | 1.65 | 3.10 | −0.73 | 43.1 | 35.9 |
| 2003 | 1.90 | 4.86 | −1.87 | 32.8 | 36.1 |
| 2004 | 2.06 | 4.01 | −2.04 | 37.8 | 29.7 |
| 2005 | 1.79 | 1.14 | −0.79 | 40.1 | 35.2 |
| 2006 | 2.08 | 2.33 | −1.09 | 31.5 | 38.5 |
| 2007 | 2.10 | −0.55 | 0.72 | 32.1 | 37.5 |
Significance codes
< 0.05
< 0.01
< 0.001
< 0.0001.
Population density corrected for area (see Methods).
The estimated degrees of freedom for a smooth function of latitude and longitude. The significance code refers to the P-value on the null hypothesis of no effect of space.
Figure 2(a) Contour plot of the smoothing function for the effect of latitude and longitude on population persistence, shown in 2003 as an example. Contour labels represent standard deviations (positive is higher persistence, negative is lower persistence). Dots are the centroid of each super-polygon. (b, c). Partial dependence plots of the effect of area (b) and residual density (c) on population persistence in 2003. In these plots, the values of all predictors but the one on the x-axis are fixed at their median values to isolate the partial contribution of the x-axis predictor to the response variable. In (b), the area at which persistence = 0.5 is the predicted critical area at the median residual density and spatial location. Plots for all years are presented in Figure S3.
Figure 3Estimated critical area for each population patch. Critical area was estimated at the centroid of each super-polygon (circles) as the area with a predicted persistence of 0.5 at the median residual density. Populations at the front of the expansion tend to have a larger critical area.