If you are seeing this message, you may be experiencing temporary network problems. Please wait a few minutes and refresh the page. If the problem persists, you may wish to report it to your local Network Manager.
It is also possible that your web browser is not configured or not able to display style sheets. In this case, although the visual presentation will be degraded, the site should continue to be functional. We recommend using the latest version of Microsoft or Mozilla web browser to help minimise these problems.
Wiley InterScience | |||||||||||
![]() Ecology LettersVolume 9 Issue 5, Pages 548 - 557 Published Online: 24 Mar 2006 Journal compilation © 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd/CNRS Published on behalf of the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
Abstract | References | Full Text: HTML, PDF (Size: 326K) | Related Articles | Citation Tracking LETTER Size and scaling of predator–prey dynamics Copyright 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd/CNRS KEYWORDS Allometry • biomass • body size • consumer resource • cycles • evolutionarily stable strategy • Lotka–Volterra • metabolism • population density • Rosenzweig–MacArthur ABSTRACTWe propose a scaled version of the Rosenzweig–MacArthur model using both Type I and Type II functional responses that incorporates the size dependence of interaction rates. Our aim is to link the energetic needs of organisms with the dynamics of interacting populations, for which survival is a result of a game-theoretic struggle for existence. We solve the scaled model of predator–prey dynamics and predict population level characteristics such as the scaling of coexistence size ranges and the optimal predator–prey size ratio. For a broad class of such models, the optimal predator–prey size ratio given available prey of a fixed size is constant. We also demonstrate how scaling predictions of prey density differ under resource limitation vs. predator drawdown. Finally, we show how evolution of predator size can destabilize population dynamics, compare scaling of predator–prey cycles to previous work, as well as discuss possible extensions of the model to multispecies communities. Editor, Minus van Baalen Manuscript received 27 June 2005 First decision made 3 August 2005 Second decision made 31 October 2005 Third decision made 13 December 2005 Manuscript accepted 16 January 2006 |
|
|
Click here to ‘Become a Fan’ of Ecology Letters on FaceBook.
![]() |