| Literature DB >> 28690827 |
Monica Granados1, Sean Duffy1, Christopher W McKindsey2, Gregor F Fussmann1.
Abstract
Intraguild predation (IGP) is an omnivorous food web configuration in which the top predator consumes both a competitor (consumer) and a second prey that it shares with the competitor. This omnivorous configuration occurs frequently in food webs, but theory suggests that it is unstable unless stabilizing mechanisms exist that can decrease the strength of the omnivore and consumer interaction. Although these mechanisms have been documented in native food webs, little is known about whether they operate in the context of an introduced species. Here, we study a marine mussel aquaculture system where the introduction of omnivorous mussels should generate an unstable food web that favors the extinction of the consumer, yet it persists. Using field and laboratory approaches, we searched for stabilizing mechanisms that could reduce interaction strengths in the food web. While field zooplankton counts suggested that mussels influence the composition and abundance of copepods, stable isotope results indicated that life-history omnivory and cannibalism facilitated the availability of prey refugia, and reduced competition and the interaction strength between the mussel omnivore and zooplankton consumers. In laboratory experiments, however, we found no evidence of adaptive feeding which could weaken predator-consumer interactions. Our food web study suggests that the impact of an introduced omnivore may not only depend on its interaction with native species but also on the availability of stabilizing mechanisms that alter the strength of those interactions.Entities:
Keywords: adaptive feeding; intraguild predation; invasive species; ontogenetic niche shift; prey size refugia; stage structure
Year: 2017 PMID: 28690827 PMCID: PMC5496542 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.2773
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ecol Evol ISSN: 2045-7758 Impact factor: 2.912
Figure 1Photographs of Mytilus edulis mussels being prepared for feeding experiment (left) and harvested off a line (right). Photographs by Sean Duffy
Figure 2(a) NMDS plot of farm and reference sites based on of zooplankton species and life‐stage composition. ANOSIM result indicates the composition between the two sites is significantly different (p = .045). B. Bar plot of zooplankton density in farm and reference sites for each zooplankton life stage. Error bars denote standard error. Reference sites had significantly higher densities (ANOVA, p = .031)
Figure 3Plot of δN against mussel size fitted with a linear model (δN ~ mussel length) for A. Site 1+ and B. Site 2+. Horizontal lines are the mean δN for adult copepods, copepod nauplii and seston in dark gray, black, and gray, respectively with 95% confidence intervals plotted around the means in dashed lines
Figure 4Logistic regression of mussel length and a binary variable created by assigning mussels into categories based on whether their δ N value was greater (1) or less than (0) the upper bound of the 95% confidence interval around the mean δN of copepod nauplii. A one‐unit increase in mussel length increases the probability the mussel δN will be greater than nauplii δN by 1.06 (GLMM)
Figure 5Selectivity of mussels (Mytilus edulis) for nauplii (Artemia franciscana) (S Artemia) in feeding trials. Diets with different fractions of algae (Isochrysis galbana) vs. nauplii were offered (fraction values are based on proportion of biomass). Total biomass of the algae and nauplii was constant across all mixtures. The dashed line denotes no feeding preference by mussel for either prey. SIsochrysis values are not shown as they mirror S Artemia values (S Isochrysis = 1 − S Artemia), and the regression result is the same for both