| Literature DB >> 26543582 |
Akira Terui1, Yusuke Miyazaki2, Akira Yoshioka3, Shin-Ichiro S Matsuzaki3.
Abstract
Current theories predict that Allee effects should be widespread in nature, but there is little consistency in empirical findings. We hypothesized that this gap can arise from ignoring spatial contexts (i.e. spatial scale and heterogeneity) that potentially mask an existing fitness-density relationship: a 'cryptic' Allee effect. To test this hypothesis, we analysed how spatial contexts interacted with conspecific density to influence the fertilization rate of the freshwater mussel Margaritifera laevis. This sessile organism has a simple fertilization process whereby females filter sperm from the water column; this system enabled us to readily assess the interaction between conspecific density and spatial heterogeneity (e.g. flow conditions) at multiple spatial levels. Our findings were twofold. First, positive density-dependence in fertilization was undetectable at a population scale (approx. less than 50.5 m(2)), probably reflecting the exponential decay of sperm density with distance from the sperm source. Second, the Allee effect was confirmed at a local level (0.25 m(2)), but only when certain flow conditions were met (slow current velocity and shallow water depth). These results suggest that spatial contexts can mask existing Allee effects.Entities:
Keywords: Allee effect; freshwater mussel; lotic system; multilevel model; stream
Year: 2015 PMID: 26543582 PMCID: PMC4632546 DOI: 10.1098/rsos.150034
Source DB: PubMed Journal: R Soc Open Sci ISSN: 2054-5703 Impact factor: 2.963
Figure 1.(a) Map of the Shubuto River system. Filled dots indicate sampling sites. (b) Schematic diagram of mussel sampling design. Dotted lines and open plots indicate sampled transects and locations of gravid females sampled, respectively.
Values of hypothesized influential variables at 10 mussel populations.
| scale | factor | mean (s.d.) | range |
|---|---|---|---|
| population | mean population densitya (ind./0.25 m2) | 18.4 (11.0) | 0.5–31.8 |
| catchment area (km2) | 77.6 (63.5) | 19.1–252.6 | |
| local | local conspecific density (ind./0.25 m2) | 18.9 (18.6) | 0–79 |
| current velocity (cm s−1) | 16.5 (14.4) | 0.2–76.5 | |
| water depth (cm) | 29.7 (13.6) | 10–62 | |
| substrate coarsenessb | 2.7 (0.3) | 1.3–3.3 |
aMean population density was estimated as the average of the local conspecific density for each study population.
bSubstrate coarseness was assessed following the modified method of Inoue & Nakano [30]. See text for details.
Figure 2.Estimated parameters for the hierarchical model explaining the fertilization rate of M. laevis at (a) the population and (b) the local level. Horizontal bars are shaded in proportion to the posterior probability density, and white and black vertical lines mark the median estimates and 95% credible intervals, respectively. Parameters for which 95% credible intervals did not include zero are shown in red. Numbers in the panels indicate the probability of being either positive or negative for each parameter. All explanatory variables were standardized before the analysis.
Figure 3.Little influence of population-level conspecific density on the fertilization rate of M. laevis. Black squares and grey circles indicate observed values of fertilization rate for each population (median) and each gravid female, respectively. Mean population density was estimated by averaging local conspecific density for each study population.
Figure 4.Local conspecific density interacts with current velocity and water depth to influence the fertilization rate of M. laevis. Solid (significant) and broken lines (not significant) indicate median prediction derived from the hierarchical linear model fitted to the data, and shaded area shows 95 percentile of prediction. Predicted values are shown separately at 25 and 75 percentiles of current velocity and water depth. Other explanatory variables not shown on the panels were fixed at mean values for prediction. Circles indicate observed values.