Literature DB >> 21801174

Body size and the division of niche space: food and predation differentially shape the distribution of Serengeti grazers.

J Grant C Hopcraft1, T Michael Anderson, Saleta Pérez-Vila, Emilian Mayemba, Han Olff.   

Abstract

1. Theory predicts that small grazers are regulated by the digestive quality of grass, while large grazers extract sufficient nutrients from low-quality forage and are regulated by its abundance instead. In addition, predation potentially affects populations of small grazers more than large grazers, because predators have difficulty capturing and handling large prey. 2. We analyse the spatial distribution of five grazer species of different body size in relation to gradients of food availability and predation risk. Specifically, we investigate how the quality of grass, the abundance of grass biomass and the associated risks of predation affect the habitat use of small, intermediate and large savanna grazers at a landscape level. 3. Resource selection functions of five mammalian grazer species surveyed over a 21-year period in Serengeti are calculated using logistic regressions. Variables included in the analyses are grass nitrogen, rainfall, topographic wetness index, woody cover, drainage lines, landscape curvature, water and human habitation. Structural equation modelling (SEM) is used to aggregate predictor variables into 'composites' representing food quality, food abundance and predation risk. Subsequently, SEM is used to investigate species' habitat use, defined as their recurrence in 5 × 5 km cells across repeated censuses. 4. The distribution of small grazers is constrained by predation and food quality, whereas the distribution of large grazers is relatively unconstrained. The distribution of the largest grazer (African buffalo) is primarily associated with forage abundance but not predation risk, while the distributions of the smallest grazers (Thomson's gazelle and Grant's gazelle) are associated with high grass quality and negatively with the risk of predation. The distributions of intermediate sized grazers (Coke's hartebeest and topi) suggest they optimize access to grass biomass of sufficient quality in relatively predator-safe areas. 5. The results illustrate how top-down (vegetation-mediated predation risk) and bottom-up factors (biomass and nutrient content of vegetation) predictably contribute to the division of niche space for herbivores that vary in body size. Furthermore, diverse grazing assemblages are composed of herbivores of many body sizes (rather than similar body sizes), because these herbivores best exploit the resources of different habitat types.
© 2011 The Authors. Journal of Animal Ecology © 2011 British Ecological Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21801174     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2011.01885.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Ecol        ISSN: 0021-8790            Impact factor:   5.091


  15 in total

1.  Conceptualizing and quantifying body condition using structural equation modelling: A user guide.

Authors:  Magali Frauendorf; Andrew M Allen; Simon Verhulst; Eelke Jongejans; Bruno J Ens; Henk-Jan van der Kolk; Hans de Kroon; Jeroen Nienhuis; Martijn van de Pol
Journal:  J Anim Ecol       Date:  2021-09-06       Impact factor: 5.606

2.  Refining the stress gradient hypothesis for mixed species groups of African mammals.

Authors:  Christian Kiffner; Diana M Boyle; Kristen Denninger-Snyder; Bernard M Kissui; Matthias Waltert; Stefan Krause
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-10-21       Impact factor: 4.996

3.  Animal body size distribution influences the ratios of nutrients supplied to plants.

Authors:  Elizabeth le Roux; Laura S van Veenhuisen; Graham I H Kerley; Joris P G M Cromsigt
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-08-24       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  The spatial distribution of African savannah herbivores: species associations and habitat occupancy in a landscape context.

Authors:  T Michael Anderson; Staci White; Bryant Davis; Rob Erhardt; Meredith Palmer; Alexandra Swanson; Margaret Kosmala; Craig Packer
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2016-09-19       Impact factor: 6.237

5.  Individual variation of isotopic niches in grazing and browsing desert ungulates.

Authors:  D Lehmann; J K E Mfune; E Gewers; C Brain; C C Voigt
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2015-05-09       Impact factor: 3.225

6.  Isotopic evidence for dietary niche overlap between barking deer and four-horned antelope in Nepal.

Authors:  Krishna Prasad Pokharel; Elizabeth Yohannes; Ioanna Salvarina; Ilse Storch
Journal:  J Biol Res (Thessalon)       Date:  2015-05-06       Impact factor: 1.889

7.  Herbivory and body size: allometries of diet quality and gastrointestinal physiology, and implications for herbivore ecology and dinosaur gigantism.

Authors:  Marcus Clauss; Patrick Steuer; Dennis W H Müller; Daryl Codron; Jürgen Hummel
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-10-30       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Seasonal patterns of mixed species groups in large East African mammals.

Authors:  Christian Kiffner; John Kioko; Cecilia Leweri; Stefan Krause
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-12-03       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Re-constructing nutritional history of Serengeti wildebeest from stable isotopes in tail hair: seasonal starvation patterns in an obligate grazer.

Authors:  K Rysava; R A R McGill; J Matthiopoulos; J G C Hopcraft
Journal:  Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom       Date:  2016-07-15       Impact factor: 2.419

10.  African vultures don't follow migratory herds: scavenger habitat use is not mediated by prey abundance.

Authors:  Corinne J Kendall; Munir Z Virani; J Grant C Hopcraft; Keith L Bildstein; Daniel I Rubenstein
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-01-08       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.