Theoretical Population Biology Research Articles

Aggregation, Competition, and Host-Parasitoid Dynamics: Stability Conditions Don't Tell it All

Previous articleNext article No AccessNotes and CommentsAggregation, Competition, and Host-Parasitoid Dynamics: Stability Conditions Don't Tell it AllAndrew D. TaylorAndrew D. Taylor Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The American Naturalist Volume 141, Number 3Mar., 1993 Published for The American Society of Naturalists Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/285487 Views: 6Total views on this site Citations: 7Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1993 The University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Senada Kalabušić, Emin Bešo, Naida Mujić, Esmir Pilav Stability analysis of a certain class of difference equations by using KAM theory, Advances in Difference Equations 2019, no.11 (May 2019).https://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-019-2148-7 Bibliography, (Jan 2010): 327–340.https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420035353.bmatt Sebastian J. Schreiber , Laurel R. Fox , and Wayne M. Getz Coevolution of Contrary Choices in Host‐Parasitoid Systems. S. J. Schreiber et al., The American Naturalist 155, no.55 (Jul 2015): 637–648.https://doi.org/10.1086/303347 Ripa, Heino Linear analysis solves two puzzles in population dynamics: the route to extinction and extinction in coloured environments, Ecology Letters 2, no.44 (Jul 1999): 219–222.https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1461-0248.1999.00073.xAndrew D Taylor Environmental Variability and the Persistence of Parasitoid–Host Metapopulation Models, Theoretical Population Biology 53, no.22 (Apr 1998): 98–107.https://doi.org/10.1006/tpbi.1997.1347M.R. Myerscough, M.J. Darwen, W.L. Hogarth Stability, persistence and structural stability in a classical predator-prey model, Ecological Modelling 89, no.1-31-3 (Aug 1996): 31–42.https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3800(95)00117-4Andrew D. Taylor Heterogeneity in host-parasitoid interactions: ‘Aggregation of risk’ and the ‘CV2 > 1 Rule’, Trends in Ecology & Evolution 8, no.1111 (Nov 1993): 400–405.https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-5347(93)90041-M

On the role of refugia in promoting prudent use of biological resources: N. V. Joshi & M. Gadgil, Theoretical Population Biology, 40(2), 1991, pp 211–229

On the role of refugia in promoting prudent use of biological resources: N. V. Joshi & M. Gadgil, Theoretical Population Biology, 40(2), 1991, pp 211–229

Spatial scale mediates the influence of habitat fragmentation on dispersal success: implications for conservation: D. F. Doak, P. C. Marino & P. M. Kareiva, Theoretical Population Biology, 41(3), 1992, pp 315–336

Spatial scale mediates the influence of habitat fragmentation on dispersal success: implications for conservation: D. F. Doak, P. C. Marino & P. M. Kareiva, Theoretical Population Biology, 41(3), 1992, pp 315–336

Preventing insect adaptation to insect-resistant crops: are seed mixtures or refugia the best strategy?

Transgenic crops expressing insecticidal toxins could soon provide safe, clean and effective means of pest control, but their usefulness will be short-lived if insects adapt to the toxins. Two planting strategies are among those that have been recommended to delay crop failure: susceptible insects could be conserved by planting either ‘refugia’, i.e. separate fields of toxic and toxin-free crop, or ‘seed mixtures’ of toxic and toxin-free plants in the same fields. However, we show that if insects can move from plant to plant, seed mixtures may actually hasten insect resistance compared with pure stands of toxic plants. Insect movement causes an increase in effective genetic dominance which can counteract reduced selection due to the mixture. This failure of seed mixtures is likely under just those conditions, low genetic dominance of resistance, which predict a good chance for resistance to the toxin to evolve slowly. Seed mixtures, unlike refugia, are therefore failure prone. This result also suggests potential problems with a third strategy, tissue-specific expression of toxins, which essentially provides a mixture of toxin-free and toxin-containing tissues on the same plant. However, better information and modelling are urgently required to evaluate alternative means of slowing insect adaptation to resistant crop plants. Legislation for toxinfree refugia may provide one of the best available means for conserving insect susceptibility.

Inclusive fitness in a homogeneous environment

A general formulation of inclusive fitness is proposed which specifically accounts for competitive effects between relatives. As an example, for an asexual population in a homogeneous inelastic environment, such as is found in a stepping-stone model of dispersal, the inclusive fitness of a breeding female, under weak selection, is independent of her direct effect on the fitness of other individuals in the population. More precisely, suppose a female acts in a way that changes not only her own fitness but the fitness of several other females in the population who may be relatives (i.e. she changes the number of their offspring). I call these changes the direct effects of the action. There will also be indirect effects on the fitness of these and other females which come from the competitive impact of the extra offspring in the next generation. The principal result is that these indirect effects exactly cancel all the direct effects except the direct effect of the actor on herself.

On the Evolutionary Stability of Dispersal to Sink Habitats

On the Evolutionary Stability of Dispersal to Sink Habitats

The Explanatory Tools of Theoretical Population Biology

There is, at present, controversy surrounding the role of the mathematical models which typify the more theoretical portions of ecology and evolutionary biology. Within these sciences there has been controversy about the “testability” of these models, both in terms of the ability of the model to make precise enough claims about the world, and in terms of our ability to determine the values of theoretical parameters. There has been concern, particularly in ecology, about the lack of realism characteristic of most models as well. These are, for the most part, issues involving the nature of theoretical explanation. Much of the current debate about null hypothesis testing, the unfalsifiability of theory, and the role of theory is symptomatic, it would seem, of the fact that these sciences have not settled on what to expect from their most mathematical theories. If there is one emerging theme, it is the need, again especially in ecology, for pluralistic theoretical treatments - which suggests that they may have been expecting too much.

Book Reviews

Book reviewed in this article: Young Children Reinvent Arithmetic: Implications of Piaget's theory Constance Kazuko Kamii and Georgia DeClark The “Encyclopedia of Transport” Series Air by J. D. Storer Lectures in Theoretical Population Biology Lev R. Ginzburg Edward M. Golenburg Englewood Cliffs. Essential Statistics D. G. Rees. The Structure and Distribution of Coral Reefs Charles Darwin. Polarized Light in Nature G. P. Konnen.

Chromosomal and Behavioral Studies of Mexican Drosophila. V. Frequencies of Multiple Insemination in Three Natural Populations

Previous articleNext article No AccessNotes and CommentsChromosomal and Behavioral Studies of Mexican Drosophila. V. Frequencies of Multiple Insemination in Three Natural PopulationsL. Levine, O. Olvera, R. F. Rockwell, M. E. de la Rosa, E. Akin, M. I. Gaso, F. Gonzalez, and J. GuzmanL. Levine Search for more articles by this author , O. Olvera Search for more articles by this author , R. F. Rockwell Search for more articles by this author , M. E. de la Rosa Search for more articles by this author , E. Akin Search for more articles by this author , M. I. Gaso Search for more articles by this author , F. Gonzalez Search for more articles by this author , and J. Guzman Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The American Naturalist Volume 129, Number 3Mar., 1987 Published for The American Society of Naturalists Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/284650 Views: 2Total views on this site Citations: 5Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1987 The University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Patricia Adair Gowaty The evolution of multiple mating, Fly 6, no.11 (Oct 2014): 3–11.https://doi.org/10.4161/fly.18330Y. B. Linhart Variation in Woody Plants; Molecular Markers, Evolutionary Processes and Conservation Biology, (Jan 2000): 341–373.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2311-4_14James M. Schwartz, Gary F. McCracken, Gordon M. Burghardt Multiple paternity in wild populations of the garter snake, Thamnophis sirtalis, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 25, no.44 (Oct 1989): 269–273.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00300053Kermit Ritland CORRELATED MATINGS IN THE PARTIAL SELFER MIMULUS GUTTATUS, Evolution 43, no.44 (May 2017): 848–859.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1989.tb05182.xChristopher J. Williams, Susan Evarts The estimation of concurrent multiple paternity probabilities in natural populations, Theoretical Population Biology 35, no.11 (Feb 1989): 90–112.https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-5809(89)90011-7

Erratum: Sex-Ratio Selection in Species with Helpers-At-The-Nest

Previous articleNext article No AccessErratum: Sex-Ratio Selection in Species with Helpers-At-The-NestPDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The American Naturalist Volume 128, Number 2Aug., 1986 Published for The American Society of Naturalists Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/284563 Citations: 2Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1986 The University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:J. William Stubblefield, Steven Hecht Orzack Resource transfers and evolution: Helpful offspring and sex allocation, Theoretical Population Biology 83 (Feb 2013): 64–81.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tpb.2012.09.004 Walter D. Koenig and Jeffrey R. Walters Sex‐Ratio Selection in Species with Helpers at the Nest: The Repayment Model Revisited. W. D. Koenig and J. R. Walters, The American Naturalist 153, no.11 (Jul 2015): 124–130.https://doi.org/10.1086/303148

Stochasticity in Stream Fish Communities: An Alternative Interpretation

Stochasticity in Stream Fish Communities: An Alternative Interpretation

The Evolution of Egg Clustering by Butterflies and Other Insects

On met en evidence le fait que la ponte en grappes chez de nombreux lepidopteres (et d'autres insectes) a evolue en reponse a la selection pour une fecondite accrue

Complexity, Diversity, and Stability: A Reconciliation of Theoretical and Empirical Results

Theoretical studies of the relationship between ecosystem complexity and stability usually conclude that systems with more species, more interspecific interactions per species (connectance), or stronger interactions are not as likely to be stable as systems with fewer of these attributes (Gardner and Ashby 1970; May 1972, 1974, 1979; DeAngelis 1975; Gilpin 1975; Pimm 1979a, 1979b, 1980). Yet, in one of the few empirical investigations of this problem, McNaughton (1977) concluded that increased complexity stabilized certain ecosystem properties; more precisely, that a large mammalian grazer changed total green plant biomass less in more diverse than in less diverse grassland plots. We try to resolve this apparent contradiction between theory and empiricism by investigating, in model grazing systems, the relationship between complexity and the lack of change in plant biomass (which we call biomass stability) following the removal of an herbivore. We established a set of structured food web models composed of one herbivore and n plant species. The models were based on the familiar Lotka-Volterra equations, and we selected their parameters over intervals designed to be biologically sensible and also to reflect the pattern of interactions in the food web. Only those models with a locally stable equilibrium involving species with positive biomasses were retained for further analysis. From each model of this subset, the herbivore was removed and the resultant change in total plant biomass followed until a new stable equilibrium was achieved. Relative biomass stability was calculated from the relative change in the total plant biomasses of the two equilibria. Clearly, a ratio near unity indicates biomass stability, while a large ratio indicates that biomass has increased considerably, following removal of the herbivore. We modeled webs of varying complexity as measured by: (1) the number of species; (2) the number of competitive interactions between plant species; and (3) species diversity (a measure combining the number of species and their relative abundances), and related these features to biomass stability. Our conclusion is that increased complexity can enhance biomass stability, even

A Note on the Evolution of Gamete Dimorphism in Algae

Previous articleNext article No AccessNotes and CommentsA Note on the Evolution of Gamete Dimorphism in AlgaeJohn D. Madsen, and Donald M. WallerJohn D. Madsen Search for more articles by this author , and Donald M. Waller Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The American Naturalist Volume 121, Number 3Mar., 1983 Published for The American Society of Naturalists Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/284073 Views: 12Total views on this site Citations: 20Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1983 The University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Tatsuya Togashi, Yusuke Horinouchi, Geoff A. Parker A comparative test of the gamete dynamics theory for the evolution of anisogamy in Bryopsidales green algae, Royal Society Open Science 8, no.33 (Mar 2021): 201611.https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.201611Jack da Silva, Victoria L. Drysdale Isogamy in large and complex volvocine algae is consistent with the gamete competition theory of the evolution of anisogamy, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 285, no.18901890 (Nov 2018): 20181954.https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2018.1954Erik R. Hanschen, Matthew D. Herron, John J. Wiens, Hisayoshi Nozaki, and Richard E. Michod Multicellularity Drives the Evolution of Sexual Traits, The American Naturalist 192, no.33 (Jul 2018): E93–E105.https://doi.org/10.1086/698301Jack Silva The evolution of sexes: A specific test of the disruptive selection theory, Ecology and Evolution 8, no.11 (Nov 2017): 207–219.https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3656Jussi Lehtonen, Hanna Kokko, Geoff A. Parker What do isogamous organisms teach us about sex and the two sexes?, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 371, no.17061706 (Oct 2016): 20150532.https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0532Sa Geng, Peter De Hoff, James G. Umen, Nick H. Barton Evolution of Sexes from an Ancestral Mating-Type Specification Pathway, PLoS Biology 12, no.77 (Jul 2014): e1001904.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001904Geoff A. Parker The origin and maintenance of two sexes (anisogamy), and their gamete sizes by gamete competition, (Apr 2011): 17–74.https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511975943.002Hiroyuki Matsuda, Peter A. Abrams The evolutionary instability of isogamy, (Apr 2011): 75–95.https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511975943.003Tatsuya Togashi, John L. Bartelt Evolution of anisogamy and related phenomena in marine green algae, (Apr 2011): 194–242.https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511975943.008C(Kate). M. Lessells, Rhonda R. Snook, David J. Hosken The evolutionary origin and maintenance of sperm, (Jan 2009): 43–67.https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-372568-4.00002-1Priya Iyer, Joan Roughgarden Gametic conflict versus contact in the evolution of anisogamy, Theoretical Population Biology 73, no.44 (Jun 2008): 461–472.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tpb.2008.02.002Michael B. Bonsall The evolution of anisogamy: The adaptive significance of damage, repair and mortality, Journal of Theoretical Biology 238, no.11 (Jan 2006): 198–210.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2005.05.007M. G. Bulmer, G. A. Parker The evolution of anisogamy: a game-theoretic approach, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences 269, no.15071507 (Nov 2002): 2381–2388.https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2002.2161DAVID B. DUSENBERY Ecological Models Explaining the Success of Distinctive Sperm and Eggs (Oogamy), Journal of Theoretical Biology 219, no.11 (Nov 2002): 1–7.https://doi.org/10.1006/jtbi.2002.3100J. P. Randerson, L. D. Hurst A comparative test of a theory for the evolution of anisogamy, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences 268, no.14691469 (Apr 2001): 879–884.https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2000.1581DAVID B. DUSENBERY Selection for High Gamete Encounter Rates Explains the Success of Male and Female Mating Types, Journal of Theoretical Biology 202, no.11 (Jan 2000): 1–10.https://doi.org/10.1006/jtbi.1999.1017Laurence D. Hurst Parasite diversity and the evolution of diploidy, multicellularity and anisogamy, Journal of Theoretical Biology 144, no.44 (Jun 1990): 429–443.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5193(05)80085-2 Paul Alan Cox , and James A. Sethian Gamete Motion, Search, and the Evolution of Anisogamy, Oogamy, and Chemotaxis, The American Naturalist 125, no.11 (Oct 2015): 74–101.https://doi.org/10.1086/284329Klaus Wöhrmann, Volker Loeschcke Population Genetics, (Jan 1985): 228–238.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-45607-7_16Linda E. Graham COLEOCHAETE AND THE ORIGIN OF LAND PLANTS, American Journal of Botany 71, no.44 (Apr 1984): 603–608.https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1537-2197.1984.tb12546.x

Topics in Theoretical Population Biology

After an introduction giving an outline and the editor's view of population biology, the following selected topics are reviewed by five authors:(1) N. Takahata(National Institute of Genetics): Local Differentiation of Population and Differentiation of Species.(2) K. Ishii (College of General Education, Nagoya University): Population Genetical Mechanism of Molecular Evolution.(3) N. Yamamura (Department of Natural Science, Saga Medical School): Optimization Principle in Evolutionary Ecology.(4) M. Tanemura (Institute of Statistical Mathematics): Pattern of Territory and Mechanism of its Formation.(5) E. Teramoto (Department of Biophysics, Faculty of Science, Kyoto University): Population Size Distribution of Biological Communities.

A Comment on the Optimization of Body Size in Drosophila According to Roff's Life History Model

Previous articleNext article No AccessNotes and CommentsA Comment on the Optimization of Body Size in Drosophila According to Roff's Life History ModelRobert E. RicklefsRobert E. Ricklefs Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The American Naturalist Volume 120, Number 5Nov., 1982 Published for The American Society of Naturalists Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/284020 Views: 2Total views on this site Citations: 4Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1982 The University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Jin Yoshimura, William M. Shields PROBABILISTIC OPTIMIZATION OF BODY SIZE: A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN GENETIC AND PHENOTYPIC OPTIMA, Evolution 49, no.22 (May 2017): 375–378.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1995.tb02250.xWILLIAM T. STARMER, LARRY L. WOLF Causes of variation in wing loading among Drosophila species, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 37, no.33 (May 2009): 247–261.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.1989.tb01903.xJan Kozłowski, Richard G. Wiegert Optimal allocation of energy to growth and reproduction, Theoretical Population Biology 29, no.11 (Feb 1986): 16–37.https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-5809(86)90003-1 Derek A. Roff Development Rates and the Optimal Body Size in Drosophila: A Reply to Ricklefs, The American Naturalist 122, no.44 (Oct 2015): 570–575.https://doi.org/10.1086/284158

Frequency-Dependent Competitive Success in an Age-Structured Model

Previous articleNext article No AccessNotes and CommentsFrequency-Dependent Competitive Success in an Age-Structured ModelMalcolm HaddonMalcolm Haddon Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The American Naturalist Volume 120, Number 3Sep., 1982 Published for The American Society of Naturalists Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/283999 Views: 3Total views on this site Citations: 4Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1982 The University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Diego J. Rodriguez Models of growth with density regulation in more than one life stage, Theoretical Population Biology 34, no.22 (Oct 1988): 93–117.https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-5809(88)90036-6Laurence D. Mueller The Evolutionary Ecology of Drosophila, (Jan 1985): 37–98.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-6980-0_2James R. Weinberg Interactions between functional groups in soft-substrata: Do species differences matter?, Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 80, no.11 (Aug 1984): 11–28.https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0981(84)90091-1Rüdiger Knapp Vegetation Science (Sociological Geobotany), (Jan 1983): 336–350.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-69445-5_20

Niche Breadth Calculation Based on Discriminant Analysis

Pyke, G. H. 1981. Optimal nectar production in a hummingbird-pollinated plant. Theoretical Population Biology 20:326-343. Reincke, D. C., and W. L. Bloom. 1979. Pollen dispersal in natural populations: a method for tracking individual grains. Systematic Botany 4:223-229. Schaal, B. A. 1975. Population structure and local differentiation in Liatris cylindracea. American Naturalist 109: 511-528. 1980. Measurement of gene flow in Lupinus texensis. Nature 284:450-45 1. Schlising, R. A., and R. A. Turpin. 1971. Hummingbird dispersal of Delphinium ccardinale pollen treated with radioactive iodine. American Journal of Botany 58:401-406. Schmitt, J. 1980. Pollinator foraging behavior and gene dispersal in Senecio (Compositae). Evolution 34:934-943. Snedecor, G. W., and W. G. Cochran. 1967. Statistical methods, sixth edition. Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa, USA. Stockhouse, R. E. 1976. A new method for studying pollen dispersal using micronized fluorescent dusts. American Midland Naturalist 96:241-245. Thomson, J. D. 1981. Spatial and temporal components of resource assessment by flower-feeding insects. Journal of Animal Ecology 50:49-59. Thomson, J. D., and R. C. Plowright. 1980. Pollen carryover, nectar rewards, and pollinator behavior, with special reference to Diervilla lonicera. Oecologia (Berlin) 46:6874. Waddington, K. D. 1981. Factors influencing pollen flow in bumblebee-pollinated Delphinium virescens. Oikos 37:153159. Waser, N. M. 1976. Food supply and nest timing of broadtailed hummingbirds in the Rocky Mountains. Condor 78:133-135. . 1978. Competition for pollination and sequential flowering in two Colorado wildflowers. Ecology 59:934944. Waser, N. M., and M. V. Price. 1982, in press. Optimal and actual outcrossing in plants, and the nature of plant-pollinator interaction. In C. E. Jones and R. J. Little, editors. Handbook of experimental pollination biology. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, New York, USA. Waser, N. M., and L. A. Real. 1979. Effective mutualism between sequentially flowering plant species. Nature 281:670-672. Waser, N. M., R. K. Vickery, Jr., and M. V. Price. 1982, in press. Patterns of seed dispersal and population differentiation in Mimulus guttatus. Evolution.

The Fallacy of the Traffic Policeman: A Response to Templeton and Lawlor

Previous articleNext article No AccessNotes and CommentsThe Fallacy of the Traffic Policeman: A Response to Templeton and LawlorJames F. Gilliam, Richard F. Green, and Nolan E. PearsonJames F. Gilliam Search for more articles by this author , Richard F. Green Search for more articles by this author , and Nolan E. Pearson Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The American Naturalist Volume 119, Number 6Jun., 1982 Published for The American Society of Naturalists Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/283962 Views: 3Total views on this site Citations: 18Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1982 The University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Mark Broom, Ross Cressman, Vlastimil Křivan , Journal of Theoretical Biology 483 ( 2019): 109993.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2019.109993Julie Martineau, David Pothier, Daniel Fortin Processes driving short-term temporal dynamics of small mammal distribution in human-disturbed environments, Oecologia 181, no.33 (Mar 2016): 831–840.https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-016-3613-6Martin S. Shapiro, Cynthia Schuck-Paim, Alex Kacelnik Risk sensitivity for amounts of and delay to rewards: Adaptation for uncertainty or by-product of reward rate maximising?, Behavioural Processes 89, no.22 (Feb 2012): 104–114.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2011.08.016L.R. Gerber, O.J. Reichman, J. Roughgarden Food hoarding: future value in optimal foraging decisions, Ecological Modelling 175, no.11 (Jun 2004): 77–85.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2003.10.022Fausto Brito e Abreu, Alex Kacelnik Energy budgets and risk-sensitive foraging in starlings, Behavioral Ecology 10, no.33 (May 1999): 338–345.https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/10.3.338M Bateson, A Kacelnik Preferences for fixed and variable food sources: variability in amount and delay., Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 63, no.33 (May 1995): 313–329.https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1995.63-313Alejandro Kacelnik, Ian A. Todd Psychological mechanisms and the Marginal Value Theorem: effect of variability in travel time on patch exploitation, Animal Behaviour 43, no.22 (Feb 1992): 313–322.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-3472(05)80226-XL. Real Animal choice behavior and the evolution of cognitive architecture, Science 253, no.50235023 (Aug 1991): 980–986.https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1887231 A. H. Welsh , A. Townsend Peterson , and Stuart A. Altmann The Fallacy of Averages, The American Naturalist 132, no.22 (Oct 2015): 277–288.https://doi.org/10.1086/284850Sonya D. Zabludoff, John Wecker, Thomas Caraco Foraging choice in laboratory rats: Constant vs. variable delay, Behavioural Processes 16, no.1-21-2 (Mar 1988): 95–110.https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-6357(88)90021-6H.C.J. Godfray, Anthony R. Ives Stochasticity in invertebrate clutch-size models, Theoretical Population Biology 33, no.11 (Feb 1988): 79–101.https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-5809(88)90005-6Thomas W. Schoener A Brief History of Optimal Foraging Ecology, (Jan 1987): 5–67.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-1839-2_1Russell D. Gray Faith and Foraging: A Critique of the “Paradigm Argument from Design”, (Jan 1987): 69–140.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-1839-2_2 D. W. Stephens , J. F. Lynch , A. E. Sorensen , and C. Gordon Preference and Profitability: Theory and Experiment, The American Naturalist 127, no.44 (Oct 2015): 533–553.https://doi.org/10.1086/284501John H. Kagel, Leonard Green, Thomas Caraco When foragers discount the future: constraint or adaptation?, Animal Behaviour 34 (Feb 1986): 271–283.https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-3472(86)90032-1Louis J. Gross An Overview of Foraging Theory, (Jan 1986): 37–57.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-69888-0_3D. W. Stephens, Eric L. Charnov Optimal foraging: Some simple stochastic models, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 10, no.44 (Jul 1982): 251–263.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00302814 Michael Turelli , John H. Gillespie , and Thomas W. Schoener The Fallacy of the Fallacy of the Averages in Ecological Optimization Theory, The American Naturalist 119, no.66 (Oct 2015): 879–884.https://doi.org/10.1086/283963

Counterintuitive Oscillations in Systems of Competition and Mutualism

Previous articleNext article No AccessNotes and CommentsCounterintuitive Oscillations in Systems of Competition and MutualismMichael E. Gilpin, Ted J. Case, and Edward A. BenderMichael E. Gilpin Search for more articles by this author , Ted J. Case Search for more articles by this author , and Edward A. Bender Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The American Naturalist Volume 119, Number 4Apr., 1982 Published for The American Society of Naturalists Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/283935 Views: 5Total views on this site Citations: 13Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1982 The University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Kayla R. S. Hale, Fernanda S. Valdovinos Ecological theory of mutualism: Robust patterns of stability and thresholds in two‐species population models, Ecology and Evolution 11, no.2424 (Dec 2021): 17651–17671.https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.8453V. R. Mikryakov, V. G. Tereshchenko, D. V. Mikryakov Using the Integral Index to Assess Destabilization Processes in the Immune System of Fish, Inland Water Biology 14, no.33 (Jun 2021): 340–348.https://doi.org/10.1134/S199508292103010XKelsey M. Yule, Christopher A. Johnson, Judith L. Bronstein, Régis Ferrière Interactions among interactions: The dynamical consequences of antagonism between mutualists, Journal of Theoretical Biology 501 (Sep 2020): 110334.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2020.110334Yu. S. Reshetnikov, V. G. Tereshchenko Analysis of the Equilibrium State of Lake Fish Community Based on Its Dynamic Phase Portrait, Biology Bulletin Reviews 9, no.44 (Aug 2019): 333–342.https://doi.org/10.1134/S2079086419040066Ю.С. Решетников, В.Г. Терещенко АНАЛИЗ РАВНОВЕСНОГО СОСТОЯНИЯ РЫБНОГО НАСЕЛЕНИЯ ОЗЕР НА ОСНОВЕ ЕГО ДИНАМИЧЕСКОГО ФАЗОВОГО ПОРТРЕТА, "Успехи современной биологии", Успехи современной биологии , no.66 (Jan 2018): 538–548.https://doi.org/10.7868/S0042132418060029Eugene Anatoly Yurtsev, Arolyn Conwill, Jeff Gore Oscillatory dynamics in a bacterial cross-protection mutualism, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113, no.2222 (May 2016): 6236–6241.https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1523317113Christopher A. Johnson, Priyanga Amarasekare Competition for benefits can promote the persistence of mutualistic interactions, Journal of Theoretical Biology 328 (Jul 2013): 54–64.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2013.03.016Eurídice Leyequién, Willem F. de Boer, Antoine Cleef Influence of body size on coexistence of bird species, Ecological Research 22, no.55 (Dec 2006): 735–741.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11284-006-0311-6K L Seip Defining and measuring species interactions in aquatic ecosystems, Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 54, no.77 (Jul 1997): 1513–1519.https://doi.org/10.1139/f97-058Peter A. Abrams, Lester Shen Population dynamics of systems with consumers that maintain a constant ratio of intake rates of two resources, Theoretical Population Biology 35, no.11 (Feb 1989): 51–89.https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-5809(89)90010-5P.H. Crowley, R.M. Nisbet, W.S.C. Gurney, J.H. Lawton Population Regulation in Animals with Complex Life-histories: Formulation and Analysis of a Damselfly Model, (Jan 1987): 1–59.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2504(08)60243-3Bindhyachal Rai, H.I. Freedman, John F. Addicott Analysis of three species models of mutualism in predator-prey and competitive systems, Mathematical Biosciences 65, no.11 (Jul 1983): 13–50.https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-5564(83)90069-XRüdiger Knapp Vegetation Science (Sociological Geobotany), (Jan 1983): 336–350.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-69445-5_20