Is spatial variation in population size structures of a stream-dwelling caddisfly due to the altered effects of a predator by a third-party species?
Predators alter abundances and life history characteristics of prey, and effects of predator–prey interactions can be altered by third-party species. Here, we examine size structures of the caddisfly, Phylloicus hansoni , in Trinidadian streams with two distinct fish assemblages: upstream reaches wh...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Hydrobiologia 2018-09, Vol.820 (1), p.65-77 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 77 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 65 |
container_title | Hydrobiologia |
container_volume | 820 |
creator | Murray, Kelly M. Stoker, David Pringle, Catherine M. Simon, Troy N. |
description | Predators alter abundances and life history characteristics of prey, and effects of predator–prey interactions can be altered by third-party species. Here, we examine size structures of the caddisfly,
Phylloicus hansoni
, in Trinidadian streams with two distinct fish assemblages: upstream reaches where the predatory killifish,
Anablepsoides hartii
, is the only fish species (
Killifish
-
Only
reaches), and downstream reaches where killifish and the omnivorous guppy,
Poecilia reticulata
, coexist (
Killifish
–
Guppy
reaches). We asked: Do
P. hansoni
larvae exhibit differences in size structure between reaches with differing fish assemblages? We found that size distributions of larvae differed between reaches in the majority of replicate streams, with smaller median body lengths in
Killifish
-
Only
reaches.
Killifish
–
Guppy
reaches had higher proportions of the largest instar, but we did not find differences in body length within an instar. No evidence of size-selective predation was found through analysis of killifish stomach contents, and environmental variables were largely similar between upstream and downstream reaches of the five study streams, aside from higher killifish abundances in upstream reaches. Our results, coupled with previous evidence of guppies altering killifish populations, suggest that the mediating effects of a third-party species (guppies) on predator–prey (killifish–caddisfly) interactions can affect the population size structure of prey populations. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10750-018-3674-0 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2049751014</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A545474744</galeid><sourcerecordid>A545474744</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-988f556c9c1b1f86d5762bfa9aa71eb67c94d9c852ad660fd4a8057111bd6a333</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kcFu1DAQhiMEEkvpA3CzxImDi53EsXNCVQVlpUpIQM_WxB5vXWXjYDvA9jl4YBylEuoBzcH-x_83HumvqjecXXDG5PvEmRSMMq5o08mWsmfVjgvZUMG5fF7t2PqiuFAvq1cp3bPC9DXbVX_2iaQZsoeR_IToyy1MxE9kDvMybir5ByQpx8XkJWIiwRFYNcKR2l84jn46EAPW-uTGE7ELkhxIvkMCY8aIlqBzaPIjOZcO5BDJcCoq3_lo6Qwxn8oiaDymD6-rFw7GhOeP51l1--nj96vP9ObL9f7q8oaaRvWZ9ko5ITrTGz5wpzorZFcPDnoAyXHopOlb2xslarBdx5xtQTEhOeeD7aBpmrPq7TZ3juHHginr-7DEqXypa9b2UnDG2-K62FwHGFH7yYUcwZSyePQmTOh86V-KVrSy1Aq8ewIUT8bf-QBLSnr_7etTL9-8JoaUIjo9R3-EeNKc6TVZvSWrS356TVazwtQbk4p3OmD8t_b_ob-S9adB</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2049751014</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Is spatial variation in population size structures of a stream-dwelling caddisfly due to the altered effects of a predator by a third-party species?</title><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>Murray, Kelly M. ; Stoker, David ; Pringle, Catherine M. ; Simon, Troy N.</creator><creatorcontrib>Murray, Kelly M. ; Stoker, David ; Pringle, Catherine M. ; Simon, Troy N.</creatorcontrib><description>Predators alter abundances and life history characteristics of prey, and effects of predator–prey interactions can be altered by third-party species. Here, we examine size structures of the caddisfly,
Phylloicus hansoni
, in Trinidadian streams with two distinct fish assemblages: upstream reaches where the predatory killifish,
Anablepsoides hartii
, is the only fish species (
Killifish
-
Only
reaches), and downstream reaches where killifish and the omnivorous guppy,
Poecilia reticulata
, coexist (
Killifish
–
Guppy
reaches). We asked: Do
P. hansoni
larvae exhibit differences in size structure between reaches with differing fish assemblages? We found that size distributions of larvae differed between reaches in the majority of replicate streams, with smaller median body lengths in
Killifish
-
Only
reaches.
Killifish
–
Guppy
reaches had higher proportions of the largest instar, but we did not find differences in body length within an instar. No evidence of size-selective predation was found through analysis of killifish stomach contents, and environmental variables were largely similar between upstream and downstream reaches of the five study streams, aside from higher killifish abundances in upstream reaches. Our results, coupled with previous evidence of guppies altering killifish populations, suggest that the mediating effects of a third-party species (guppies) on predator–prey (killifish–caddisfly) interactions can affect the population size structure of prey populations.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0018-8158</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-5117</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10750-018-3674-0</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cham: Springer International Publishing</publisher><subject>Analysis ; Aquatic insects ; Biomedical and Life Sciences ; Body length ; Downstream ; Ecology ; Fish ; Fishes ; Freshwater & Marine Ecology ; Freshwater fishes ; Instars ; Interactions ; Interspecific relationships ; Larvae ; Life history ; Life Sciences ; Population number ; Populations ; Predation ; Predator-prey interactions ; Predators ; Prey ; Primary Research Paper ; Rivers ; Spatial variations ; Species ; Stomach ; Stomach content ; Streams ; Third party ; Upstream ; Zoology</subject><ispartof>Hydrobiologia, 2018-09, Vol.820 (1), p.65-77</ispartof><rights>Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2018 Springer</rights><rights>Hydrobiologia is a copyright of Springer, (2018). All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-988f556c9c1b1f86d5762bfa9aa71eb67c94d9c852ad660fd4a8057111bd6a333</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-988f556c9c1b1f86d5762bfa9aa71eb67c94d9c852ad660fd4a8057111bd6a333</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-4774-6948 ; 0000-0001-7153-8092</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10750-018-3674-0$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10750-018-3674-0$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,27911,27912,41475,42544,51306</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Murray, Kelly M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stoker, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pringle, Catherine M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Simon, Troy N.</creatorcontrib><title>Is spatial variation in population size structures of a stream-dwelling caddisfly due to the altered effects of a predator by a third-party species?</title><title>Hydrobiologia</title><addtitle>Hydrobiologia</addtitle><description>Predators alter abundances and life history characteristics of prey, and effects of predator–prey interactions can be altered by third-party species. Here, we examine size structures of the caddisfly,
Phylloicus hansoni
, in Trinidadian streams with two distinct fish assemblages: upstream reaches where the predatory killifish,
Anablepsoides hartii
, is the only fish species (
Killifish
-
Only
reaches), and downstream reaches where killifish and the omnivorous guppy,
Poecilia reticulata
, coexist (
Killifish
–
Guppy
reaches). We asked: Do
P. hansoni
larvae exhibit differences in size structure between reaches with differing fish assemblages? We found that size distributions of larvae differed between reaches in the majority of replicate streams, with smaller median body lengths in
Killifish
-
Only
reaches.
Killifish
–
Guppy
reaches had higher proportions of the largest instar, but we did not find differences in body length within an instar. No evidence of size-selective predation was found through analysis of killifish stomach contents, and environmental variables were largely similar between upstream and downstream reaches of the five study streams, aside from higher killifish abundances in upstream reaches. Our results, coupled with previous evidence of guppies altering killifish populations, suggest that the mediating effects of a third-party species (guppies) on predator–prey (killifish–caddisfly) interactions can affect the population size structure of prey populations.</description><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Aquatic insects</subject><subject>Biomedical and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Body length</subject><subject>Downstream</subject><subject>Ecology</subject><subject>Fish</subject><subject>Fishes</subject><subject>Freshwater & Marine Ecology</subject><subject>Freshwater fishes</subject><subject>Instars</subject><subject>Interactions</subject><subject>Interspecific relationships</subject><subject>Larvae</subject><subject>Life history</subject><subject>Life Sciences</subject><subject>Population number</subject><subject>Populations</subject><subject>Predation</subject><subject>Predator-prey interactions</subject><subject>Predators</subject><subject>Prey</subject><subject>Primary Research Paper</subject><subject>Rivers</subject><subject>Spatial variations</subject><subject>Species</subject><subject>Stomach</subject><subject>Stomach content</subject><subject>Streams</subject><subject>Third party</subject><subject>Upstream</subject><subject>Zoology</subject><issn>0018-8158</issn><issn>1573-5117</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kcFu1DAQhiMEEkvpA3CzxImDi53EsXNCVQVlpUpIQM_WxB5vXWXjYDvA9jl4YBylEuoBzcH-x_83HumvqjecXXDG5PvEmRSMMq5o08mWsmfVjgvZUMG5fF7t2PqiuFAvq1cp3bPC9DXbVX_2iaQZsoeR_IToyy1MxE9kDvMybir5ByQpx8XkJWIiwRFYNcKR2l84jn46EAPW-uTGE7ELkhxIvkMCY8aIlqBzaPIjOZcO5BDJcCoq3_lo6Qwxn8oiaDymD6-rFw7GhOeP51l1--nj96vP9ObL9f7q8oaaRvWZ9ko5ITrTGz5wpzorZFcPDnoAyXHopOlb2xslarBdx5xtQTEhOeeD7aBpmrPq7TZ3juHHginr-7DEqXypa9b2UnDG2-K62FwHGFH7yYUcwZSyePQmTOh86V-KVrSy1Aq8ewIUT8bf-QBLSnr_7etTL9-8JoaUIjo9R3-EeNKc6TVZvSWrS356TVazwtQbk4p3OmD8t_b_ob-S9adB</recordid><startdate>20180901</startdate><enddate>20180901</enddate><creator>Murray, Kelly M.</creator><creator>Stoker, David</creator><creator>Pringle, Catherine M.</creator><creator>Simon, Troy N.</creator><general>Springer International Publishing</general><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H95</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4774-6948</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7153-8092</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20180901</creationdate><title>Is spatial variation in population size structures of a stream-dwelling caddisfly due to the altered effects of a predator by a third-party species?</title><author>Murray, Kelly M. ; Stoker, David ; Pringle, Catherine M. ; Simon, Troy N.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-988f556c9c1b1f86d5762bfa9aa71eb67c94d9c852ad660fd4a8057111bd6a333</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Aquatic insects</topic><topic>Biomedical and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Body length</topic><topic>Downstream</topic><topic>Ecology</topic><topic>Fish</topic><topic>Fishes</topic><topic>Freshwater & Marine Ecology</topic><topic>Freshwater fishes</topic><topic>Instars</topic><topic>Interactions</topic><topic>Interspecific relationships</topic><topic>Larvae</topic><topic>Life history</topic><topic>Life Sciences</topic><topic>Population number</topic><topic>Populations</topic><topic>Predation</topic><topic>Predator-prey interactions</topic><topic>Predators</topic><topic>Prey</topic><topic>Primary Research Paper</topic><topic>Rivers</topic><topic>Spatial variations</topic><topic>Species</topic><topic>Stomach</topic><topic>Stomach content</topic><topic>Streams</topic><topic>Third party</topic><topic>Upstream</topic><topic>Zoology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Murray, Kelly M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stoker, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pringle, Catherine M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Simon, Troy N.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 1: Biological Sciences & Living Resources</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Hydrobiologia</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Murray, Kelly M.</au><au>Stoker, David</au><au>Pringle, Catherine M.</au><au>Simon, Troy N.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Is spatial variation in population size structures of a stream-dwelling caddisfly due to the altered effects of a predator by a third-party species?</atitle><jtitle>Hydrobiologia</jtitle><stitle>Hydrobiologia</stitle><date>2018-09-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>820</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>65</spage><epage>77</epage><pages>65-77</pages><issn>0018-8158</issn><eissn>1573-5117</eissn><abstract>Predators alter abundances and life history characteristics of prey, and effects of predator–prey interactions can be altered by third-party species. Here, we examine size structures of the caddisfly,
Phylloicus hansoni
, in Trinidadian streams with two distinct fish assemblages: upstream reaches where the predatory killifish,
Anablepsoides hartii
, is the only fish species (
Killifish
-
Only
reaches), and downstream reaches where killifish and the omnivorous guppy,
Poecilia reticulata
, coexist (
Killifish
–
Guppy
reaches). We asked: Do
P. hansoni
larvae exhibit differences in size structure between reaches with differing fish assemblages? We found that size distributions of larvae differed between reaches in the majority of replicate streams, with smaller median body lengths in
Killifish
-
Only
reaches.
Killifish
–
Guppy
reaches had higher proportions of the largest instar, but we did not find differences in body length within an instar. No evidence of size-selective predation was found through analysis of killifish stomach contents, and environmental variables were largely similar between upstream and downstream reaches of the five study streams, aside from higher killifish abundances in upstream reaches. Our results, coupled with previous evidence of guppies altering killifish populations, suggest that the mediating effects of a third-party species (guppies) on predator–prey (killifish–caddisfly) interactions can affect the population size structure of prey populations.</abstract><cop>Cham</cop><pub>Springer International Publishing</pub><doi>10.1007/s10750-018-3674-0</doi><tpages>13</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4774-6948</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7153-8092</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0018-8158 |
ispartof | Hydrobiologia, 2018-09, Vol.820 (1), p.65-77 |
issn | 0018-8158 1573-5117 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2049751014 |
source | Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals |
subjects | Analysis Aquatic insects Biomedical and Life Sciences Body length Downstream Ecology Fish Fishes Freshwater & Marine Ecology Freshwater fishes Instars Interactions Interspecific relationships Larvae Life history Life Sciences Population number Populations Predation Predator-prey interactions Predators Prey Primary Research Paper Rivers Spatial variations Species Stomach Stomach content Streams Third party Upstream Zoology |
title | Is spatial variation in population size structures of a stream-dwelling caddisfly due to the altered effects of a predator by a third-party species? |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T03%3A56%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Is%20spatial%20variation%20in%20population%20size%20structures%20of%20a%20stream-dwelling%20caddisfly%20due%20to%20the%20altered%20effects%20of%20a%20predator%20by%20a%20third-party%20species?&rft.jtitle=Hydrobiologia&rft.au=Murray,%20Kelly%20M.&rft.date=2018-09-01&rft.volume=820&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=65&rft.epage=77&rft.pages=65-77&rft.issn=0018-8158&rft.eissn=1573-5117&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10750-018-3674-0&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA545474744%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2049751014&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A545474744&rfr_iscdi=true |