Body size and species coexistence in consumer–resource interactions: A comparison of two alternative theoretical frameworks

Abstract

Species coexistence involving trophic interactions has been investigated under two theoretical frameworks—partitioning shared resources and accessing exclusive resources. The influence of body size on coexistence is well studied under the exclusive resources framework, but has received less attention under the shared-resources framework. We investigate body-size-dependent allometric extensions of a classical MacArthur-type model where two consumers compete for two shared resources. The equilibrium coexistence criteria are compared against the general predictions of the alternative framework over exclusive resources. From the asymmetry in body size allometry of resource encounter versus demand our model shows, counterintuitively, and contrary to the exclusive resource framework, that a smaller consumer should be competitively superior across a wide range of supplies of the two resource types. Experimental studies are reviewed to resolve this difference among the two frameworks that arise from their respective assumptions over resource distribution. Another prediction is that the smaller consumer may have relatively stronger control over equilibrium resource abundance, and the loss of smaller consumers from a community may induce relatively stronger trophic cascades. Finally, from satiating consumers’ functional response, our model predicts that greater difference among resource sizes can allow a broader range of consumer body sizes to coexist, and this is consistent with the predictions of the alternative framework over exclusive resources. Overall, this analysis provides an objective comparison of the two alternative approaches to understand species coexistence that have heretofore developed in relative isolation. It advances classical consumer–resource theory to show how body size can be an important factor in resource competition and coexistence.