Stano Pekár“Populační ekologie živočichů“  dN = Nr dt + + .. mutualism (plants and pollinators) 0 + .. commensalism (saprophytism, parasitism, phoresis) - + .. predation (herbivory, parasitism), mimicry - 0 .. amensalism (allelopathy) - - .. competition Increase Neutral Decrease Increase + + Neutral 0 + 0 0 Decrease + - - 0 - Effect of species 1 on fitness of species 2 Effectofspecies2on fitnessofspecies1 DIRECT INDIRECT Apparent competition Facilitation Exploitation competition   n k kp D 1 2 1    kk kk pp pp a 21 21 Niche breadth Levin’s index (D): - pk .. proportion of individuals in class k - does not include resource availability - 1 < D < ∞ Smith’s index (FT): - qk .. proportion of available individuals in class k - 0 < FT < 1 Niche overlap Pianka’s index (a): - does not account for resource availability - 0 < a < 1 Lloyd’s index (L): - 0 < L < ∞   n k kk qpFT 1  k kk q pp L 21  based on the logistic differential model species 1: N1, K1, r1 species 2: N2, K2, r2         1 21 11 1 1 K NN rN dt dN         2 21 22 2 1 K NN rN dt dN        K N Nr t N 1 d d assumptions: - all parameters are constant - individuals of the same species are identical - environment is homogenous, differentiation of niches is not possible - only exact compensation is present  model of Lotka (1925) and Volterra (1926)  total competitive effect (intra + inter-specific) (N1+ N2) where  .. coefficient of competition  = 0 .. no interspecific competition  < 1 .. species 2 has lower effect on species 1 than species 1 on itself  = 0.5 .. one individual of species 1 is equivalent to 0.5 individuals of species 2)  = 1 .. both species has equal effect on the other one  > 1 .. species 2 has greater effect on species 1 than species 1 on itself species 1: species 2:  if competing species use the same resource then interspecific competition is equal to intraspecific         2 2121 22 2 1 K NN rN dt dN          1 2121 11 1 1 K NN rN dt dN   examination of the model behaviour using null isoclines  used to describe change in any two variables in coupled differential equations by projecting orthogonal vectors  identification of isoclines: a set of abundances for which the change in populations is 0: N1 N2 K1 0 dt dN N1 N2 K2 species 1 species 2 0 dt dN 0 dt dN 0 dt dN 0 dt dN  species 1 r1N1 (1 - [N1 + 12N2] / K1) = 0 r1N1 ([K1 - N1 - 12N2] / K1) = 0 trivial solution if r1, N1, K1 = 0 and if K1 - N1 - 12N2 = 0 then N1 = K1 - 12N2 if N1 = 0 then N2 = K1/12 if N2 = 0 then N1 = K1  species 2 r2N2 (1 - [N2 + 21 N1] / K2) = 0 N2 = K2 - 21N1 trivial solution if r2, N2, K2 = 0 if N2 = 0 then N1 = K2/21 if N1 = 0 then N2 = K2  above isocline i1 and below i2 competition is weak  in-between i1 and i2 competition is strong N1 N2 K2 K1 21 2  K 12 1  K 1. Species 2 drives species 1 to extinction  K and  determine the model behaviour disregarding initial densities species 2 (stronger competitor) will outcompete species 1 (weaker competitor)  equilibrium (0, K2) K1 = K2 12 > 21 12 1 2  K K  21 2 1  K K  N1 N2 K2 K1 12 1  K 21 2  K time 0 species 2 species 1 N K r1 = r2 N01 = N02 2. Species 1 drives species 2 to extinction species 1 (stronger competitor) will outcompete species 2 (weaker competitor) equilibrium (K1, 0) 12 1 2  K K  21 2 1  K K  N1 N2 K2 K1 12 1  K 21 2  K K1 = K2 12 < 21 r1 = r2 N01 = N02 time 0 species 1 species 2 N K 3. Stable coexistence of species  disregarding initial densities both species will coexist at stable equilibrium (where isoclines cross)  at at equilibrium population density of both species is reduced  both species are weak competitors  equilibrium (K1*, K2*) K1 = K2 12, 21 < 1 N1 N2 K2 K1 12 1  K 21 2  K stable equilibrium 12 1 2  K K  21 2 1  K K  r1 < r2 N01 = N02 0 species 1 species 2 time N K K* one species will drive other to extinction depending on the initial conditions  coexistence only for a short time  both species are strong competitors equilibrium (K1, 0) or (0, K2) 4. Competitive exclusion r1 = r2 K1 = K2 N1 N2 K2 K1 12 1  K 21 2  K 12 1 2  K K  21 2 1  K K  N01 < N02 0 species 2 species 1 time N K2 12, 21 > 1 N01 > N02 0 species 1 species 2 time N K1 Jacobian matrix of partial derivations for 2dimensional system  evaluation of the derivations for densities close to equilibrium negative  estimate eigenvalues of the matrix (negative values indicate approach to equilibrium): - real parts of all eigenvalues < 0 .. globally stable - real part of some eigenvalues < 0 .. saddle stability - real part of all eigenvalues > 0 .. globally unstable - imaginary parts present .. oscillations - imaginary parts absent .. no oscillations  Lotka-Volterra system is stable for 1221 < 1                      2 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 dddd dddd N tN N tN N tN N tN J  when Rhizopertha and Oryzaephilus were reared separately both species increased to 420-450 individuals (= K)  when reared together Rhizopertha reached K1 = 360, while Oryzaephilus K2 = 150 individuals  combination resulted in more efficient conversion of grain (K12 = 510 individuals)  three combinations of densities converged to the same stable equilibrium  prediction of Lotka-Volterra model is correct N1 Rhizopertha N2Oryzaephilus K1 K2 0 1 2 3 1: N1 < N2 2: N1 = N2 3: N1 > N2 Crombie (1947) equilibrium          1 ,212,11 1 ,11,1 K NNK r tt tt eNN           2 ,121,22 2 ,21,2 K NNK r tt tt eNN  dynamic (multiple) regression is used to estimate parameters from a series of abundances .. a, b, c – regression parameters ar  1 121 ,2 1 1 ,11 ,1 1,1 ln K r N K r Nr N N tt t t            b r K  r Kc  2 212 ,1 2 2 ,12 ,2 1,2 ln K r N K r Nr N N tt t t             solution of the differential model – Ricker’s model:  Vandermeer & Boucher (1978)   .. coefficient of mutalism  Facultative (able to exist independently) x obligatory mutualists  Outcome depends on the type of mutualism         2 1212 22 2 1 K NN rN dt dN          1 2121 11 1 1 K NN rN dt dN  N1 N2 K2 K1 Facultative mutualists