Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
17 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
Nicholson & Bailey
1935 Balance of animal pop's (comparison to Lotka-Volterra model) |
- intrxns cause the densities of anmls to oscillate around steady state (interspecific oscillation)
-age distribution is important - increase time = incr oscillations |
|
Sinclair & Krebs
2002 Top-down, Bottom-up processes |
- Bottom-up is the primary factor determining r
- 3 secondary processes can override it: top-down, social intrxns, stochastic disturbance |
|
Lytle & Merritt
2004 Pop Model (Cottonwood) |
Developed a stochastic, density dependent pop model
|
|
May
1974 Population stable points, stable cycles |
- as r ↑, goes from a stable equilibrium point to stable cyclic oscillations (continuing in #)
-settling into finite cycle depends on initial pop point |
|
Paine
1966 Food Web Complexity (Removal of barnacle predator species) |
- Local species diversity is related to the # of predators in the system and their efficiency in preventing a single species from monopolizing a limiting requisite
|
|
Coulson et al
2001 Sheep population density, demography |
- Age/sex structure of pop fluctuates independently of pop size
- Survival rates of m/f differ in response to pop density + weather - Bad weather + high density = depressed survival rates |
|
Connell
1961 Interspecific competition, barnacles |
- lower limit of distribution in intertidal is determined by biotic factors (interspecific competition)
-upper limit is set by physical factors |
|
Olson
1995 Life-history stage affects fish interactions (bluegill, bass) |
- species interaction depends on the life history stage
- mixed competition/predation intrxn - competition can reduce bass growth rate (bass ↓ w/ bluegill density ↑) |
|
Lotka Voltera
Predator-prey relationship |
- stable oscillations shown in their model
- oversimplified, closed system - defined important concepts: numerical and functional response of predators, predators can be a regulating force, heterogeneity/perturbations needed to prevent extinction of prey |
|
Kiers et al
2003 Legume-rhizobium mutualism |
-soybeans penalize rhizobia that fail to fix N2 inside their root nodules
- hosts can provide a selective environment that favors cooperative behavior |
|
Stachowicz & Whitlatch
2005 Mutualist diversity (kelp) |
- diversity of functionally similar mutualists may enhance host species
-mutualist diversity may be important for maintenance of ecosystems |
|
Huffaker
1958 Parasite/Host relationship |
- stable oscillations achievable in a closed system
-heterogeneity must be present for prey population to persist |
|
Simberloff & Wilson
1968 Theory of Island Biogeography - insects |
- evidence of faunistic equilibrium from the observation of immigration and extinction processes
- supported IBT |
|
Bender & Fahrig
2005 Inter-patch movement, metapopulation theory |
- habitat patch size and isolation can be poor predictors of interpatch movement when the landscape contains many different cover types
- movement of habitat generalists may be harder to predict than specialists |
|
Schoener
1971 Feeding Strategies |
- Benefit > cost
- optimal diet, foraging space, foraging period, group size |
|
Gause
1934 Pred/prey relationship |
- spatial heterogeneity required for persistence of predators and prey
- Lab experiment |
|
Anderson & May
1978 Parasitism and regulation: 3 requirements |
1. Non-liner functional response: threshold pt where parasite #'s are large enough to decrease host pop
2. Overdispersion/patchiness 3. Density-dependence within individual host |