Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- Preface
- 1 The metabolic theory of ecology and the role of body size in marine and freshwater ecosystems
- 2 Body size and suspension feeding
- 3 Life histories and body size
- 4 Relationship between biomass turnover and body size for stream communities
- 5 Body size in streams: macroinvertebrate community size composition along natural and human-induced environmental gradients
- 6 Body size and predatory interactions in freshwaters: scaling from individuals to communities
- 7 Body size and trophic cascades in lakes
- 8 Body size and scale invariance: multifractals in invertebrate communities
- 9 Body size and biogeography
- 10 By wind, wings or water: body size, dispersal and range size in aquatic invertebrates
- 11 Body size and diversity in marine systems
- 12 Interplay between individual growth and population feedbacks shapes body-size distributions
- 13 The consequences of body size in model microbial ecosystems
- 14 Body size, exploitation and conservation of marine organisms
- 15 How body size mediates the role of animals in nutrient cycling in aquatic ecosystems
- 16 Body sizes in food chains of animal predators and parasites
- 17 Body size in aquatic ecology: important, but not the whole story
- Index
- References
16 - Body sizes in food chains of animal predators and parasites
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 December 2009
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- Preface
- 1 The metabolic theory of ecology and the role of body size in marine and freshwater ecosystems
- 2 Body size and suspension feeding
- 3 Life histories and body size
- 4 Relationship between biomass turnover and body size for stream communities
- 5 Body size in streams: macroinvertebrate community size composition along natural and human-induced environmental gradients
- 6 Body size and predatory interactions in freshwaters: scaling from individuals to communities
- 7 Body size and trophic cascades in lakes
- 8 Body size and scale invariance: multifractals in invertebrate communities
- 9 Body size and biogeography
- 10 By wind, wings or water: body size, dispersal and range size in aquatic invertebrates
- 11 Body size and diversity in marine systems
- 12 Interplay between individual growth and population feedbacks shapes body-size distributions
- 13 The consequences of body size in model microbial ecosystems
- 14 Body size, exploitation and conservation of marine organisms
- 15 How body size mediates the role of animals in nutrient cycling in aquatic ecosystems
- 16 Body sizes in food chains of animal predators and parasites
- 17 Body size in aquatic ecology: important, but not the whole story
- Index
- References
Summary
Introduction
Food chains in which animal predators are bigger than their animal prey are called predator chains; those in which the consumers are smaller are called parasite chains (Elton, 1927; Hutchinson, 1959, p. 147). The purpose of this chapter is to display and test empirically some consequences, for predator chains and parasite chains, of assuming that the average mass of a consumer species (predator or parasite) is related to the average mass of its animal resource species (prey or host) by a power law with an exponent less than 1.
In 1858, as part of his development of the theory of evolution, Wallace (1858, p. 54) noted that animal predators are generally larger and less numerous than their prey. Among the many echoes of Wallace's remark, Elton (1927) observed anecdotally that animal predators weigh more than their prey in terrestrial food chains, Hutchinson (1959) analyzed some of the theoretical consequences of predators weighing more than their prey, and Sheldon, Prakash and Sutcliffe (1972) and others posited that marine animal predators outweigh their marine animal prey (see also Humphries, this volume; Woodward & Warren, this volume). Only recently have body sizes been studied empirically in parasite chains (Memmott, Martinez & Cohen, 2000; Leaper & Huxham, 2002) and parasitoid chains (Cohen et al., 2005). The study of parasitoid chains (e.g. Rott & Godfray, 2000; Memmott et al., 2000) appears not to have been considered by Elton (1927) and Hutchinson (1959).
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Body Size: The Structure and Function of Aquatic Ecosystems , pp. 306 - 325Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2007
References
& (1994). Population abundance and body size in animal assemblages. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B, 343, 33–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, & (1993). Non-metabolic explanations for the relationship between body size and animal abundance. Journal of Animal Ecology, 62, 694–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , et al. (2005). Body sizes of consumers and their resources. Ecology, 86, 2545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , et al. (2006). Consumer-resource body-size relationships in natural food webs. Ecology, 87, 2411–2417.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, & (2001). Dinosaurs, dragons, and dwarfs: the evolution of maximal body size. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98, 14518–14523.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1991). Food webs as a focus for unifying ecological theory. Ecology International (International Association for Ecology Bulletin), 19, 1–13.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. E. & Carpenter, S. R. (2005). Species' average body mass and numerical abundance in a community food web: statistical questions in estimating the relationship. In Dynamic Food Webs: Multispecies Assemblages, Ecosystem Development and Environmental Change – A Volume of Theoretical Ecology, ed. , & . Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 137–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, & (1990). Community Food Webs: Data and Theory. Biomathematics Vol. 20. Heidelberg, Berlin, New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , & (1993). Body sizes of animal predators and animal prey in food webs. Journal of Animal Ecology, 62, 67–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, & (2003). Ecological community description using the food web, species abundance, and body size. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100, 1781–1786.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , & (2005). Body sizes of hosts and parasitoids in individual feeding relationships. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102, 684–689.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1927). Animal Ecology. (New impression with additional notes 1935.) New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
(2001). Not being the wrong size. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, 2, 48–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, & (1994). The size ratio between planktonic predators and their prey. Limnology and Oceanography, 39, 395–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
& (1997). Development of hemoglobin, hematocrit and erythrocyte values in Galápagos fur seals. Marine Mammal Science, 13, 100–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1959). Homage to Santa Rosalia or why are there so many kinds of animals?American Naturalist, 93, 145–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jonsson, T. & Ebenman, B. (1998a). Trophic links and the relationship between predator and prey body sizes in food webs. Chapter 2 in , Food Webs and the Distribution of Body Sizes. Linköping Studies in Science and Technology, Dissertation 535, Linköping, Sweden, pp. 63–81.Google Scholar
& (1998b). Effects of predator-prey body size ratios on the stability of food chains. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 193, 407–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jonsson, T., Cohen, J. E. & Carpenter, S. R. (2005). Food webs, body size and species abundance in ecological community description. In Food Webs: From Connectivity to Energetics, Advances in Ecological Research Vol. 36, ed. . San Diego: Elsevier, pp. 1–84.Google Scholar
& (2002). Size constraints in a real food web: predator, parasite and prey body-size relationships. Oikos, 99, 443–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, & (2000). Predators, parasitoids and pathogens: species richness, trophic generality and body sizes in a natural food web. Journal of Animal Ecology, 69, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , & (1986). A test of the Menge-Sutherland model of community organization in a tropical rocky intertidal food web. Oecologia (Berlin), 71, 75–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
& (1995). Primary production required to sustain global fisheries. Nature, 374, 255–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1983). The Ecological Implications of Body Size. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
& (2004). Trophic links' length and slope in the Tuesday Lake food web with species' body mass and numerical abundance. Journal of Animal Ecology, 73, 852–866.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reuman, D. C. & Cohen, J. E. (2005). Estimating relative energy fluxes using the food web, species abundance, and body size. In Food Webs: From Connectivity to Energetics, Advances in Ecological Research Vol. 36, ed. . San Diego: Elsevier, pp. 137–182.Google Scholar
& (2000). The structure of a leafminer-parasitoid community. Journal of Animal Ecology, 69, 274–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, & (1972). The size distribution of particles in the ocean. Limnology and Oceanography, 17, 327–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1985). Empirical relationships between predator and prey size among terrestrial vertebrate predators. Oecologia (Berlin), 67, 555–565.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wallace, A. R. (1858). On the tendency of varieties to depart indefinitely from the original type. In C. R. Darwin & A. R. Wallace, On the tendency of species to form varieties; and on the perpetuation of varieties and species by natural means of selection. Journal of the Proceedings of the Linnean Society, Zoology, 20 Aug. 1858, 3, 45–62. Online: http://pages.britishlibrary.net/charles.darwin3/jpls.html#natsel
& (1987). Invertebrate predator-prey body size relationships: an explanation for upper triangular food webs and patterns in food web structure?Oecologia (Berlin), 74, 231–235.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
& (1995). Probabilistic optimization of body size: a discrepancy between genetic and phenotypic optima. Evolution, 49, 375–378.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
- 2
- Cited by