Literature DB >> 28307404

Spatial scaling of allometry for terrestrial, mammalian carnivores.

K Shawn Smallwood1, Geoff Jones2, Christine Schonewald3,4.   

Abstract

A regression slope of -0.75 between log10 density and log10 body mass is thought to express equivalence of energy conversion among species' populations of similar taxonomic and trophic status. Using larger sample sizes than the usual 1-3 density estimates per species, we estimated a regression slope of -0.71 for terrestrial mammalian carnivores. We investigated the sampling variation in this estimate, and those derived from smaller intra-specific subsets, using 1000-iteration bootstrap analyses to obtain 90% confidence intervals. As expected, these widened as random subsets were reduced in size, but always contained the postulated -0.75. However, log10 density also declined as 3/4 of the log10 spatial extent of study area, and study area accounted for virtually all of the variation in density that was previously thought due to body mass. We removed the effect of study area by using the species-specific regression models between density and study area to predict density at a common scale of 400 km2. These common-scale densities regressed against body mass with a slope of -0.16, but separated into body mass classes less than and greater than 11 kg, they produced slopes that were not significantly different from zero. We show that the allometry of density could be a case of circular logic, whereby body mass has influenced the investigator's choice of study area, and the resulting scale-dependent densities are related back to body mass. To test the allometry hypothesis, the effect of study area on density estimates needs to be removed. This requires conducting larger-scale studies of the smaller-bodied species so that all species compared are represented by an average study area that is near the common scale. Furthermore, study sites need to be selected and designed to represent more than the local detail in species' density.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Allometry; Carnivora; Density; Ecology; Scale

Year:  1996        PMID: 28307404     DOI: 10.1007/BF00333952

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oecologia        ISSN: 0029-8549            Impact factor:   3.225


  8 in total

1.  Wolves, moose, and the allometry of population cycles.

Authors:  R O Peterson; R E Page; K M Dodge
Journal:  Science       Date:  1984-06-22       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Self-organization, transformity, and information.

Authors:  H T Odum
Journal:  Science       Date:  1988-11-25       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 3.  Comparing brains.

Authors:  P H Harvey; J R Krebs
Journal:  Science       Date:  1990-07-13       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Production, reproduction and size in mammals.

Authors:  David Western
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1983-09       Impact factor: 3.225

5.  The effect of body size on animal abundance.

Authors:  Robert Henry Peters; Karen Wassenberg
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1983-10       Impact factor: 3.225

6.  Scaling population density and spatial pattern for terrestrial, mammalian carnivores.

Authors:  K Shawn Smallwood; Christine Schonewald
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 3.225

7.  Life history patterns in birds and mammals and their evolutionary interpretation.

Authors:  David Western; James Ssemakula
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1982-09       Impact factor: 3.225

Review 8.  Complications inherent in scaling the basal rate of metabolism in mammals.

Authors:  B K McNab
Journal:  Q Rev Biol       Date:  1988-03       Impact factor: 4.875

  8 in total
  1 in total

1.  The contribution of small individuals to density-body size relationships.

Authors:  John L Ackerman; David R Bellwood
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2003-04-17       Impact factor: 3.225

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.