| Literature DB >> 23342048 |
Karsten Schönrogge1, Tracey Begg, Graham N Stone.
Abstract
Revealing the interactions between alien species and native communities is central to understanding the ecological consequences of range expansion. Much has been learned through study of the communities developing around invading herbivorous insects. Much less, however, is known about the significance of such aliens for native vertebrate predators for which invaders may represent a novel food source. We quantified spatial patterns in native bird predation of invading gall-inducing Andricus wasps associated with introduced Turkey oak (Quercus cerris) at eight sites across the UK. These gallwasps are available at high density before the emergence of caterpillars that are the principle spring food of native insectivorous birds. Native birds showed positive spatial density dependence in gall attack rates at two sites in southern England, foraging most extensively on trees with highest gall densities. In a subsequent study at one of these sites, positive spatial density dependence persisted through four of five sequential week-long periods of data collection. Both patterns imply that invading galls are a significant resource for at least some native bird populations. Density dependence was strongest in southern UK bird populations that have had longest exposure to the invading gallwasps. We hypothesise that this pattern results from the time taken for native bird populations to learn how to exploit this novel resource.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23342048 PMCID: PMC3544717 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0053959
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Geographic locations of the eight sampling sites in Britain.
Galling and predation rates at the eight locations sampled in 1995.
| Site | Galling rates | Predation rates | ||||||||||
| Site mean ± S.E. (n) | σ2 | Highest tree mean | σ2 h | Lowest tree mean | σ2 l | Site mean ± S.E. (n) | σ2 | Highest tree mean | σ2 h | Lowest Tree mean | σ2 l | |
| Silwood Park* | 0.81±0.22 (12) | 0.59 | 2.44±0.48 (15) | 3.48 | 0.00no galls | na | 0.44±0.07 (11) | 0.06 | 0.86±0.05 (14) | 0.05 | 0.00no galls | na |
| Puttenham* | 0.39±0.06 (12) | 0.05 | 0.79±0.12 (15) | 0.23 | 0.01±0.01 (15) | >0.01 | 0.17±0.03 (12) | 0.01 | 0.22±0.09 (15) | 0.08 | 0.00no pred. (1) | na |
| Tatton Park | 0.26±0.05 (12) | 0.03 | 0.46±0.13 (15) | 0.27 | 0.02±0.02 (15) | >0.01 | 0.21±0.05 (12) | 0.04 | 0.66±0.33(3) | 0.33 | 0.00no pred. (1) | na |
| Rufford Park | 0.34±0.06 (12) | 0.04 | 0.57±0.12 (15) | 0.22 | 0.08±0.04 (15) | 0.02 | 0.32±0.05 (12) | 0.03 | 0.67±0.10 (15) | 0.15 | 0.00no pred. (4) | na |
| Erskin | 0.21±0.06 (9) | 0.03 | 0.64±0.13 (15) | 0.27 | 0.02±0.02 (15) | >0.01 | 0.57±0.07 (9) | 0.04 | 0.79±0.16 (6) | 0.16 | 0.40±0.25 (5) | 0.3 |
| Falkland | 0.30±0.05 (12) | 0.04 | 0.68±0.13 (15) | 0.25 | 0.01±0.01 (15) | >0.01 | 0.47±0.06 (12) | 0.04 | 0.75±0.07 (13) | 0.06 | 0.00no pred. (1) | na |
| Beauly | 0.40±0.20(10) | 0.38 | 1.18±0.41 (15) | 2.52 | 0.02±0.02 (15) | >0.01 | 0.12±0.05 (10) | 0.03 | 0.50±0.50 (2) | 0.5 | 0.00no pred. (1) | na |
| Dunrobin | 1.23±0.74 (7) | 3.86 | 5.58±0.67 (15) | 6.69 | 0.14±0.10 (15) | 0.15 | 0.006±0.005 (7) | 0.01 | 0.04±0.04 (9) | 0.01 | 0.00no pred. (9) | na |
Means (±1standard error) and variances (σ2) of galling and predation rates, given as the site mean calculated across trees (with shoots and branches averaged within trees). Numbers in brackets give the number of trees contributing to each mean. Highest and Lowest tree means indicate means across branches for the trees with the highest and lowest gall density at each site, respectively. In these columns, the numbers in brackets indicate the number of branches of a total of 15/tree bearing ≥1 galls. Asterisks (*) in the first column indicate locations where spatially density dependent relationships were detected (see Figure 2).
Galls on only 1 shoot in the sample from all 7 trees showed signs of predation. Dunrobin was excluded from further statistical analyses.
Figure 2Patterns of spatial density dependence among trees at each site.
Significance levels are indicated by superscripts as follows: ns non significant; * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001. p = 0.05 is equivalent to p = 0.017 after Dunn-Šidàk adjustment (Table 2). Note that the scale of the y-axis is different in for Dunrobin (h).
Observed patterns of spatial density dependence in bird predation on Andricus bud galls across the UK.
| Change in Deviance | d.f. | Overall deviance | d.f. | % Deviance explained | F-value | Significance, P (after Dunn-Šidàk correctionp0.05 = 0.017) | Proportion positive parameterestimates | |
|
| ||||||||
| Silwood Park (1) | 158.83 | 82 | 837.33 | 359 | 19 | 1.71 | P<0.003(*) | 0.63 |
| Puttenham (2) | 71.33 | 45 | 365.94 | 235 | 20 | 2.34 | P<0.0008 (*) | 0.58 |
| Tatton Park (3) | 26.28 | 22 | 164.92 | 123 | 16 | 3.40 | P<0.006(*) | 0.18 |
| Rufford (4) | 45.36 | 30 | 401.70 | 179 | 11 | 1.88 | P<0.05 | 0.44 |
| Erskine (5) | 45.25 | 20 | 177.18 | 98 | 26 | 1.70 | ns | 0.40 |
| Falkland (6) | 74.05 | 32 | 335.86 | 157 | 22 | 2.60 | P<0.01 | 0.55 |
| Beauly (7) | 19.82 | 26 | 112.02 | 108 | 18 | 0.51 | ns | 0.23 |
|
| ||||||||
| Silwood Park (1) | 1.82 | 11 | 83.44 | 142 | 2 | 0.55 | ns | 0.73 |
| Puttenham (2) | 4.91 | 11 | 40.86 | 121 | 12 | 1.44 | ns | 0.73 |
| Tatton Park (3) | 3.46 | 11 | 22.02 | 83 | 16 | 1.43 | ns | 0.09 |
| Rufford (4) | 5.89 | 12 | 55.34 | 112 | 11 | 1.37 | ns | 0.64 |
| Erskine (5) | 1.48 | 8 | 17.12 | 62 | 9 | 0.76 | ns | 0.75 |
| Falkland (6) | 3.16 | 11 | 42.21 | 92 | 7 | 0.83 | ns | 0.55 |
| Beauly (7) | 0.50 | 8 | 16.30 | 61 | 3 | 0.18 | ns | 0.00 |
|
| ||||||||
| Silwood Park (1) | 2.09 | 1 | 2.68 | 10 | 78 | 33.95 | P<0.0003 (*) | positive |
| Puttenham (2) | 0.17 | 1 | 0.40 | 11 | 43 | 8.11 | P<0.05 | positive |
| Tatton Park (3) | 0.04 | 1 | 0.23 | 11 | 17 | 1.81 | ns | |
| Rufford (4) | 0.18 | 1 | 0.89 | 11 | 20 | 2.70 | ns | |
| Erskine (5) | 0.004 | 1 | 0.096 | 8 | 4 | 0.30 | ns | |
| Falkland (6) | 0.05 | 1 | 0.53 | 11 | 9 | 0.005 | ns | |
| Beauly (7) | 0.02 | 1 | 0.18 | 9 | 11 | 1.17 | ns | |
Dunrobin Castle is excluded due to very low predation rates. Analysis summaries are presented at three hierarchical spatial scales: A. Among shoots (within branches within trees); 2. Among branches (within trees); 3. Among trees within sites. Analyses for 2. and 3. were carried out over the averages of gall densities and predation rates at the lower hierarchical levels. Analyses were all generalised linear models with quasibinomial errors and a logit link. Significance levels are shown unadjusted. Significance at P<0.05 after Dunn-Šidàk adjustment of significance levels for 3 tests are indicated by an asterisk (*). The righthand column shows the proportion of slopes at the hierarchical level analysed showing positive density dependence.
Figure 3Patterns of spatial density dependence through time.
The figure shows patterns in density dependence among trees over five weeks starting with the last week of March 2006 at Puttenham Common (site 2, Fig. 1). Significance levels are indicated by superscripts as follows: ns non significant; * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001. p = 0.05 is equivalent to p = 0.017 after Dunn-Šidàk adjustment (Table 3).
Spatial density dependence in bird predation of Andricus bud galls at Puttenham Common.
| Change in Deviance | d.f. | Overall deviance | d.f. | % Deviance explained | F-value | Significance, P (after Dunn-Šidàk adjustment p0.05 = 0.017) | Proportion positive parameter estimates | |
|
| ||||||||
| Week | ||||||||
| 1 | 97.52 | 47 | 520.27 | 182 | 19 | 1.32 | ns | 0.30 |
| 2 | 52.52 | 53 | 407.42 | 193 | 13 | 0.93 | ns | 0.49 |
| 3 | 52.76 | 41 | 344.92 | 188 | 15 | 1.39 | ns | 0.24 |
| 4 | 60.27 | 38 | 270.83 | 140 | 22 | 1.17 | ns | 0.21 |
| 5 | 51.14 | 27 | 222.92 | 127 | 23 | 1.87 | <0.05 | 0.26 |
|
| ||||||||
| Week | ||||||||
| 1 | 1.61 | 11 | 14.39 | 82 | 11 | 1.76 | ns | 0.55 |
| 2 | 0.25 | 11 | 9.59 | 82 | 3 | 0.35 | ns | 0.45 |
| 3 | 0.87 | 11 | 7.52 | 86 | 12 | 2.11 | <0.05 | 058 |
| 4 | 0.70 | 11 | 5.28 | 66 | 13 | 0.93 | ns | 0.55 |
| 5 | 0.75 | 10 | 4.09 | 59 | 18 | 1.49 | ns | 0.40 |
|
| ||||||||
| Week | ||||||||
| 1 | 0.26 | 1 | 0.64 | 11 | 41 | 7.10 | <0.05 | Positive |
| 2 | 0.34 | 1 | 0.46 | 11 | 74 | 27.74 | <0.001(*) | Positive |
| 3 | 0.26 | 1 | 0.43 | 11 | 60 | 17.09 | <0.005(*) | Positive |
| 4 | 0.01 | 1 | 0.08 | 11 | 13 | 1.45 | ns | |
| 5 | 0.05 | 1 | 0.09 | 10 | 55 | 10.12 | <0.05 | Positive |
Analysis summaries are presented at three spatial scales: 1. Among shoots (within branches within trees); 2. Among branches (within trees); 3. Among trees within sites. Analyses for 2 & 3 were carried out over the averages of gall densities and predation rates at the lower levels of nesting. Analyses were all generalised linear models with quasibinomial errors and a logit link. Significance levels are shown unadjusted. Significance at P<0.05 after Dunn-Šidàk adjustment of significance levels for 3 tests are indicated by an asterisk (*).The right hand column shows the proportion of slopes at the hierarchical level analysed showing positive density dependence.
Between-week pairwise Spearman Rank Correlation Coefficients (R2).
| Gall density | ||||||
| Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | ||
| Predation rate | Week 1 | 0.72 | 0.78 | 0.73 | 0.79 | |
| Week 2 | 0.32 | 0.83 | 0.48 | 0.75 | ||
| Week 3 | 0.57 | 0.38 | 0.55 | 0.82 | ||
| Week 4 | 0.41 | 0.77 | 0.49 | 0.79 | ||
| Week 5 | 0.51 | 0.77 | 0.51 | 0.81 | ||
Matrix values above the diagonal show rank correlations in gall density, while values below the diagonal show rank correlations in predation rates. All correlations had 10 degrees of freedom, and all except one (predation rates between week 1 & 2 p = 0.052) are significant at p<0.05. All correlations for gall densities are significant at p<0.01.