A review of methods for quantifying spatial predator–prey overlap
Background Studies that attempt to measure shifts in species distributions often consider a single species in isolation. However, understanding changes in spatial overlap between predators and their prey might provide deeper insight into how species redistribution affects food web dynamics. Predator...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Global ecology and biogeography 2019-11, Vol.28 (11), p.1561-1577 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1577 |
---|---|
container_issue | 11 |
container_start_page | 1561 |
container_title | Global ecology and biogeography |
container_volume | 28 |
creator | Carroll, Gemma Holsman, Kirstin K. Brodie, Stephanie Thorson, James T. Hazen, Elliott L. Bograd, Steven J. Haltuch, Melissa A. Kotwicki, Stan Samhouri, Jameal Spencer, Paul Willis‐Norton, Ellen Selden, Rebecca L. Peres‐Neto, Pedro |
description | Background
Studies that attempt to measure shifts in species distributions often consider a single species in isolation. However, understanding changes in spatial overlap between predators and their prey might provide deeper insight into how species redistribution affects food web dynamics.
Predator–prey overlap metrics
Here, we review a suite of 10 metrics [range overlap, area overlap, the local index of collocation (Pianka's O), Hurlbert's index, biomass‐weighted overlap, asymmetrical alpha, Schoener's D, Bhattacharyya's coefficient, the global index of collocation and the AB ratio] that describe how two species overlap in space, using concepts such as binary co‐occurrence, encounter rates, spatial niche similarity, spatial independence, geographical similarity and trophic transfer. We describe the specific ecological insights that can be gained using each overlap metric, in order to determine which is most appropriate for describing spatial predator–prey interactions for different applications.
Simulation and case study
We use simulated predator and prey distributions to demonstrate how the 10 metrics respond to variation in three types of predator–prey interactions: changing spatial overlap between predator and prey, changing predator population size and changing patterns of predator aggregation in response to prey density. We also apply these overlap metrics to a case study of a predatory fish (arrowtooth flounder, Atheresthes stomias) and its prey (juvenile walleye pollock, Gadus chalcogrammus) in the Eastern Bering Sea, AK, USA. We show how the metrics can be applied to understand spatial and temporal variation in the overlap of species distributions in this rapidly changing Arctic ecosystem.
Conclusions
Using both simulated and empirical data, we provide a roadmap for ecologists and other practitioners to select overlap metrics to describe particular aspects of spatial predator–prey interactions. We outline a range of research and management applications for which each metric may be suited. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/geb.12984 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2305643094</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2305643094</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2974-aa3bbb46c2ae7c264bff49a8c5f5ec3a49ff07438c37565a96b81198b96a4e233</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kL1OwzAURi0EEqUw8AaWmBjS-j_xWKpSkCqxgMRm2a5dUqV1aqetsvEOvCFPQiCIjbvcbzjfvdIB4BqjEe5mvHJmhIks2AkYYCZEVhBanP5l8noOLlJaI4Q442IAphMY3aF0Rxg83LjmLSwT9CHC3V5vm9K35XYFU62bUlewjm6pmxA_3z-62MJwcLHS9SU487pK7up3D8HL_ex5-pAtnuaP08kis0TmLNOaGmOYsES73BLBjPdM6sJyz52lmknvUc5oYWnOBddSmAJjWRgpNHOE0iG46e_WMez2LjVqHfZx271UhCIuGEWSddRtT9kYUorOqzqWGx1bhZH6dqQ6R-rHUceOe_ZYVq79H1Tz2V3f-AKpsmlA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2305643094</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A review of methods for quantifying spatial predator–prey overlap</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Journals</source><creator>Carroll, Gemma ; Holsman, Kirstin K. ; Brodie, Stephanie ; Thorson, James T. ; Hazen, Elliott L. ; Bograd, Steven J. ; Haltuch, Melissa A. ; Kotwicki, Stan ; Samhouri, Jameal ; Spencer, Paul ; Willis‐Norton, Ellen ; Selden, Rebecca L. ; Peres‐Neto, Pedro</creator><contributor>Peres‐Neto, Pedro</contributor><creatorcontrib>Carroll, Gemma ; Holsman, Kirstin K. ; Brodie, Stephanie ; Thorson, James T. ; Hazen, Elliott L. ; Bograd, Steven J. ; Haltuch, Melissa A. ; Kotwicki, Stan ; Samhouri, Jameal ; Spencer, Paul ; Willis‐Norton, Ellen ; Selden, Rebecca L. ; Peres‐Neto, Pedro ; Peres‐Neto, Pedro</creatorcontrib><description>Background
Studies that attempt to measure shifts in species distributions often consider a single species in isolation. However, understanding changes in spatial overlap between predators and their prey might provide deeper insight into how species redistribution affects food web dynamics.
Predator–prey overlap metrics
Here, we review a suite of 10 metrics [range overlap, area overlap, the local index of collocation (Pianka's O), Hurlbert's index, biomass‐weighted overlap, asymmetrical alpha, Schoener's D, Bhattacharyya's coefficient, the global index of collocation and the AB ratio] that describe how two species overlap in space, using concepts such as binary co‐occurrence, encounter rates, spatial niche similarity, spatial independence, geographical similarity and trophic transfer. We describe the specific ecological insights that can be gained using each overlap metric, in order to determine which is most appropriate for describing spatial predator–prey interactions for different applications.
Simulation and case study
We use simulated predator and prey distributions to demonstrate how the 10 metrics respond to variation in three types of predator–prey interactions: changing spatial overlap between predator and prey, changing predator population size and changing patterns of predator aggregation in response to prey density. We also apply these overlap metrics to a case study of a predatory fish (arrowtooth flounder, Atheresthes stomias) and its prey (juvenile walleye pollock, Gadus chalcogrammus) in the Eastern Bering Sea, AK, USA. We show how the metrics can be applied to understand spatial and temporal variation in the overlap of species distributions in this rapidly changing Arctic ecosystem.
Conclusions
Using both simulated and empirical data, we provide a roadmap for ecologists and other practitioners to select overlap metrics to describe particular aspects of spatial predator–prey interactions. We outline a range of research and management applications for which each metric may be suited.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1466-822X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1466-8238</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/geb.12984</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>arrowtooth flounder ; Case studies ; climate change ; cold pool ; Collocation ; Eastern Bering Sea ; ecosystem models ; Environmental changes ; Food chains ; Food webs ; Gadus chalcogrammus ; Niches ; Polar environments ; Population number ; Predator-prey interactions ; Predator-prey simulation ; Predators ; predator–prey overlap ; Prey ; Similarity ; Simulation ; spatial overlap ; Species ; species distribution models ; species interactions ; Temporal variations ; walleye pollock</subject><ispartof>Global ecology and biogeography, 2019-11, Vol.28 (11), p.1561-1577</ispartof><rights>2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2974-aa3bbb46c2ae7c264bff49a8c5f5ec3a49ff07438c37565a96b81198b96a4e233</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2974-aa3bbb46c2ae7c264bff49a8c5f5ec3a49ff07438c37565a96b81198b96a4e233</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7776-0946</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fgeb.12984$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fgeb.12984$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,1418,27929,27930,45579,45580</link.rule.ids></links><search><contributor>Peres‐Neto, Pedro</contributor><creatorcontrib>Carroll, Gemma</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Holsman, Kirstin K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brodie, Stephanie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thorson, James T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hazen, Elliott L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bograd, Steven J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haltuch, Melissa A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kotwicki, Stan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Samhouri, Jameal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spencer, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Willis‐Norton, Ellen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Selden, Rebecca L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peres‐Neto, Pedro</creatorcontrib><title>A review of methods for quantifying spatial predator–prey overlap</title><title>Global ecology and biogeography</title><description>Background
Studies that attempt to measure shifts in species distributions often consider a single species in isolation. However, understanding changes in spatial overlap between predators and their prey might provide deeper insight into how species redistribution affects food web dynamics.
Predator–prey overlap metrics
Here, we review a suite of 10 metrics [range overlap, area overlap, the local index of collocation (Pianka's O), Hurlbert's index, biomass‐weighted overlap, asymmetrical alpha, Schoener's D, Bhattacharyya's coefficient, the global index of collocation and the AB ratio] that describe how two species overlap in space, using concepts such as binary co‐occurrence, encounter rates, spatial niche similarity, spatial independence, geographical similarity and trophic transfer. We describe the specific ecological insights that can be gained using each overlap metric, in order to determine which is most appropriate for describing spatial predator–prey interactions for different applications.
Simulation and case study
We use simulated predator and prey distributions to demonstrate how the 10 metrics respond to variation in three types of predator–prey interactions: changing spatial overlap between predator and prey, changing predator population size and changing patterns of predator aggregation in response to prey density. We also apply these overlap metrics to a case study of a predatory fish (arrowtooth flounder, Atheresthes stomias) and its prey (juvenile walleye pollock, Gadus chalcogrammus) in the Eastern Bering Sea, AK, USA. We show how the metrics can be applied to understand spatial and temporal variation in the overlap of species distributions in this rapidly changing Arctic ecosystem.
Conclusions
Using both simulated and empirical data, we provide a roadmap for ecologists and other practitioners to select overlap metrics to describe particular aspects of spatial predator–prey interactions. We outline a range of research and management applications for which each metric may be suited.</description><subject>arrowtooth flounder</subject><subject>Case studies</subject><subject>climate change</subject><subject>cold pool</subject><subject>Collocation</subject><subject>Eastern Bering Sea</subject><subject>ecosystem models</subject><subject>Environmental changes</subject><subject>Food chains</subject><subject>Food webs</subject><subject>Gadus chalcogrammus</subject><subject>Niches</subject><subject>Polar environments</subject><subject>Population number</subject><subject>Predator-prey interactions</subject><subject>Predator-prey simulation</subject><subject>Predators</subject><subject>predator–prey overlap</subject><subject>Prey</subject><subject>Similarity</subject><subject>Simulation</subject><subject>spatial overlap</subject><subject>Species</subject><subject>species distribution models</subject><subject>species interactions</subject><subject>Temporal variations</subject><subject>walleye pollock</subject><issn>1466-822X</issn><issn>1466-8238</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kL1OwzAURi0EEqUw8AaWmBjS-j_xWKpSkCqxgMRm2a5dUqV1aqetsvEOvCFPQiCIjbvcbzjfvdIB4BqjEe5mvHJmhIks2AkYYCZEVhBanP5l8noOLlJaI4Q442IAphMY3aF0Rxg83LjmLSwT9CHC3V5vm9K35XYFU62bUlewjm6pmxA_3z-62MJwcLHS9SU487pK7up3D8HL_ex5-pAtnuaP08kis0TmLNOaGmOYsES73BLBjPdM6sJyz52lmknvUc5oYWnOBddSmAJjWRgpNHOE0iG46e_WMez2LjVqHfZx271UhCIuGEWSddRtT9kYUorOqzqWGx1bhZH6dqQ6R-rHUceOe_ZYVq79H1Tz2V3f-AKpsmlA</recordid><startdate>201911</startdate><enddate>201911</enddate><creator>Carroll, Gemma</creator><creator>Holsman, Kirstin K.</creator><creator>Brodie, Stephanie</creator><creator>Thorson, James T.</creator><creator>Hazen, Elliott L.</creator><creator>Bograd, Steven J.</creator><creator>Haltuch, Melissa A.</creator><creator>Kotwicki, Stan</creator><creator>Samhouri, Jameal</creator><creator>Spencer, Paul</creator><creator>Willis‐Norton, Ellen</creator><creator>Selden, Rebecca L.</creator><creator>Peres‐Neto, Pedro</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>C1K</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7776-0946</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201911</creationdate><title>A review of methods for quantifying spatial predator–prey overlap</title><author>Carroll, Gemma ; Holsman, Kirstin K. ; Brodie, Stephanie ; Thorson, James T. ; Hazen, Elliott L. ; Bograd, Steven J. ; Haltuch, Melissa A. ; Kotwicki, Stan ; Samhouri, Jameal ; Spencer, Paul ; Willis‐Norton, Ellen ; Selden, Rebecca L. ; Peres‐Neto, Pedro</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2974-aa3bbb46c2ae7c264bff49a8c5f5ec3a49ff07438c37565a96b81198b96a4e233</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>arrowtooth flounder</topic><topic>Case studies</topic><topic>climate change</topic><topic>cold pool</topic><topic>Collocation</topic><topic>Eastern Bering Sea</topic><topic>ecosystem models</topic><topic>Environmental changes</topic><topic>Food chains</topic><topic>Food webs</topic><topic>Gadus chalcogrammus</topic><topic>Niches</topic><topic>Polar environments</topic><topic>Population number</topic><topic>Predator-prey interactions</topic><topic>Predator-prey simulation</topic><topic>Predators</topic><topic>predator–prey overlap</topic><topic>Prey</topic><topic>Similarity</topic><topic>Simulation</topic><topic>spatial overlap</topic><topic>Species</topic><topic>species distribution models</topic><topic>species interactions</topic><topic>Temporal variations</topic><topic>walleye pollock</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Carroll, Gemma</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Holsman, Kirstin K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brodie, Stephanie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thorson, James T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hazen, Elliott L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bograd, Steven J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haltuch, Melissa A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kotwicki, Stan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Samhouri, Jameal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spencer, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Willis‐Norton, Ellen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Selden, Rebecca L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peres‐Neto, Pedro</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><jtitle>Global ecology and biogeography</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Carroll, Gemma</au><au>Holsman, Kirstin K.</au><au>Brodie, Stephanie</au><au>Thorson, James T.</au><au>Hazen, Elliott L.</au><au>Bograd, Steven J.</au><au>Haltuch, Melissa A.</au><au>Kotwicki, Stan</au><au>Samhouri, Jameal</au><au>Spencer, Paul</au><au>Willis‐Norton, Ellen</au><au>Selden, Rebecca L.</au><au>Peres‐Neto, Pedro</au><au>Peres‐Neto, Pedro</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A review of methods for quantifying spatial predator–prey overlap</atitle><jtitle>Global ecology and biogeography</jtitle><date>2019-11</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>28</volume><issue>11</issue><spage>1561</spage><epage>1577</epage><pages>1561-1577</pages><issn>1466-822X</issn><eissn>1466-8238</eissn><abstract>Background
Studies that attempt to measure shifts in species distributions often consider a single species in isolation. However, understanding changes in spatial overlap between predators and their prey might provide deeper insight into how species redistribution affects food web dynamics.
Predator–prey overlap metrics
Here, we review a suite of 10 metrics [range overlap, area overlap, the local index of collocation (Pianka's O), Hurlbert's index, biomass‐weighted overlap, asymmetrical alpha, Schoener's D, Bhattacharyya's coefficient, the global index of collocation and the AB ratio] that describe how two species overlap in space, using concepts such as binary co‐occurrence, encounter rates, spatial niche similarity, spatial independence, geographical similarity and trophic transfer. We describe the specific ecological insights that can be gained using each overlap metric, in order to determine which is most appropriate for describing spatial predator–prey interactions for different applications.
Simulation and case study
We use simulated predator and prey distributions to demonstrate how the 10 metrics respond to variation in three types of predator–prey interactions: changing spatial overlap between predator and prey, changing predator population size and changing patterns of predator aggregation in response to prey density. We also apply these overlap metrics to a case study of a predatory fish (arrowtooth flounder, Atheresthes stomias) and its prey (juvenile walleye pollock, Gadus chalcogrammus) in the Eastern Bering Sea, AK, USA. We show how the metrics can be applied to understand spatial and temporal variation in the overlap of species distributions in this rapidly changing Arctic ecosystem.
Conclusions
Using both simulated and empirical data, we provide a roadmap for ecologists and other practitioners to select overlap metrics to describe particular aspects of spatial predator–prey interactions. We outline a range of research and management applications for which each metric may be suited.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><doi>10.1111/geb.12984</doi><tpages>17</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7776-0946</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1466-822X |
ispartof | Global ecology and biogeography, 2019-11, Vol.28 (11), p.1561-1577 |
issn | 1466-822X 1466-8238 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2305643094 |
source | Wiley-Blackwell Journals |
subjects | arrowtooth flounder Case studies climate change cold pool Collocation Eastern Bering Sea ecosystem models Environmental changes Food chains Food webs Gadus chalcogrammus Niches Polar environments Population number Predator-prey interactions Predator-prey simulation Predators predator–prey overlap Prey Similarity Simulation spatial overlap Species species distribution models species interactions Temporal variations walleye pollock |
title | A review of methods for quantifying spatial predator–prey overlap |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-13T22%3A54%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20review%20of%20methods%20for%20quantifying%20spatial%20predator%E2%80%93prey%20overlap&rft.jtitle=Global%20ecology%20and%20biogeography&rft.au=Carroll,%20Gemma&rft.date=2019-11&rft.volume=28&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=1561&rft.epage=1577&rft.pages=1561-1577&rft.issn=1466-822X&rft.eissn=1466-8238&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/geb.12984&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2305643094%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2305643094&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |