Literature DB >> 23998642

Snake co-occurrence patterns are best explained by habitat and hypothesized effects of interspecific interactions.

David A Steen1, Christopher J W McClure, Jean C Brock, D Craig Rudolph, Josh B Pierce, James R Lee, W Jeffrey Humphries, Beau B Gregory, William B Sutton, Lora L Smith, Danna L Baxley, Dirk J Stevenson, Craig Guyer.   

Abstract

Snakes often occur in species-rich assemblages, and sympatry is thought to be facilitated primarily by low diet overlap, not interspecific interactions. We selected, a priori, three species pairs consisting of species that are morphologically and taxonomically similar and may therefore be likely to engage in interspecific, consumptive competition. We then examined a large-scale database of snake detection/nondetection data and used occupancy modelling to determine whether these species occur together more or less frequently than expected by chance while accounting for variation in detection probability among species and incorporating important habitat categories in the models. For some snakes, we obtained evidence that the probabilities that habitat patches are used are influenced by the presence of potentially competing congeneric species. Specifically, timber rattlesnakes (Crotalus horridus) were less likely than expected by chance to use areas that also contained eastern diamond-backed rattlesnakes (Crotalus adamanteus) when the proportion of evergreen forest was relatively high. Otherwise, they occurred together more often than expected by chance. Complex relationships were revealed between habitat use, detection probabilities and occupancy probabilities of North American racers (Coluber constrictor) and coachwhips (Coluber flagellum) that indicated the probability of competitive exclusion increased with increasing area of grassland habitat, although there was some model uncertainty. Cornsnakes (Pantherophis guttatus or Pantherophis slowinskii) and ratsnakes (Pantherophis alleghaniensis, Pantherophis spiloides, or Pantherophis obsoletus) exhibited differences in habitat selection, but we obtained no evidence that patterns of use for this species pair were influenced by current interspecific interactions. Overall, our results are consistent with the hypothesis that competitive interactions influence snake assemblage composition; the strength of these effects was affected by landscape-scale habitat features. Furthermore, we suggest that current interspecific interactions may influence snake occupancy, challenging the paradigm that contemporary patterns of snake co-occurrence are largely a function of diet partitioning that arose over evolutionary time.
© 2013 The Authors. Journal of Animal Ecology © 2013 British Ecological Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Coluber; Crotalus; Elaphe; Pantherophis; co-existence; competition; detection probability; occupancy modelling; reptile; sympatry

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23998642     DOI: 10.1111/1365-2656.12121

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


  9 in total

1.  Facilitative interaction promotes occupancy of a desert amphibian across a climate gradient.

Authors:  Matthew M Smith; Caren S Goldberg
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2022-02-21       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  Co-occurrence models fail to infer underlying patterns of avoidance and aggregation when closure is violated.

Authors:  Robert C Lonsinger
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2022-07-11       Impact factor: 3.167

3.  Community confounding in joint species distribution models.

Authors:  Justin J Van Ee; Jacob S Ivan; Mevin B Hooten
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-07-18       Impact factor: 4.996

4.  Multi-species occupancy modeling suggests interspecific interaction among the three ungulate species.

Authors:  Hemant Singh; Amira Sharief; Bheem Dutt Joshi; Vineet Kumar; Tanoy Mukherjee; Kailash Chandra; Nitin Bhardwaj; Mukesh Thakur; Lalit Kumar Sharma
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-10-20       Impact factor: 4.996

5.  Effects of interspecific interaction-linked habitat factors on moose resource selection and environmental stress.

Authors:  Heng Bao; John M Fryxell; Hui Liu; Hongliang Dou; Yingjie Ma; Guangshun Jiang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-01-27       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  When habitat matters: Habitat preferences can modulate co-occurrence patterns of similar sympatric species.

Authors:  César Augusto Estevo; Mariana Baldy Nagy-Reis; James D Nichols
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-07-26       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Effects of human impacts on habitat use, activity patterns and ecological relationships among medium and small felids of the Atlantic Forest.

Authors:  Paula Cruz; María Eugenia Iezzi; Carlos De Angelo; Diego Varela; Mario S Di Bitetti; Agustin Paviolo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-08-01       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Camera trap reveals the co-occurrence patterns of two sympatric muntjac species in southern Anhui Province, China: No spatial segregation.

Authors:  Shuaitao Deng; Jiaqi Li; Yashu Qu; Jun He; Kai Liu; Hui Xue; Peng Cui; Xiangdong Ruan; Hailong Wu
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2021-12-03       Impact factor: 2.912

9.  Morphologically Cryptic Amphipod Species Are "Ecological Clones" at Regional but Not at Local Scale: A Case Study of Four Niphargus Species.

Authors:  Žiga Fišer; Florian Altermatt; Valerija Zakšek; Tea Knapič; Cene Fišer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-30       Impact factor: 3.240

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.