Rinehart Shelby, Long Jeremy D
Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama, USA.
Department of Biology and the Coastal and Marine Institute Laboratory, San Diego State University, San Diego, California, USA.
Ecology. 2022 May;103(5):e3623. doi: 10.1002/ecy.3623. Epub 2022 Apr 11.
Omnivory is ubiquitous in ecological communities. Yet, we lack a consensus of how plant alternative resources impact the ability of omnivores to suppress prey populations. Previous work suggests that plant alternative resources can increase, decrease, or have no effect on the magnitude of omnivore-prey interactions. This discrepancy may arise from (1) the ability of omnivore populations to respond to plant alternative resources and (2) identity-specific effects of plant alternative resources. We used a meta-analysis to examine how omnivore population responses and the identity of plant alternative resources affect (1) omnivore predation rates (mainly reported as per capita predation rate) and (2) omnivore impacts on prey population density. Plant alternative resources reduced omnivore predation rate regardless of identity. The suppression of the predation rate by flowers and flowering plants was magnified when pollen alone was tested as the alternative resource. Surprisingly, plant alternative resource availability reduced prey density, suggesting that omnivore predation increased with plant alternative resources. This discrepancy (plant alternative resources not only decreased omnivore predation rates but also decreased prey density) resulted from experimental differences in the ability of omnivore populations to respond to plant alternative resources. In the presence of plant alternative resources, allowing omnivore population responses decreased prey density, while not allowing population responses increased prey density. Because omnivores commonly suppress prey density in the presence of plant alternative resources when population responses of omnivores are allowed, the effectiveness of biological control may depend upon the availability of such resources and the facilitation of population responses.
杂食现象在生态群落中普遍存在。然而,对于植物替代资源如何影响杂食动物抑制猎物种群的能力,我们尚未达成共识。先前的研究表明,植物替代资源可能会增强、减弱或不影响杂食动物与猎物之间相互作用的强度。这种差异可能源于:(1)杂食动物种群对植物替代资源的响应能力;(2)植物替代资源的特定身份效应。我们通过荟萃分析来研究杂食动物种群的响应以及植物替代资源的身份如何影响:(1)杂食动物的捕食率(主要以人均捕食率报告);(2)杂食动物对猎物种群密度的影响。无论植物替代资源的身份如何,其都会降低杂食动物的捕食率。当仅将花粉作为替代资源进行测试时,花朵和开花植物对捕食率的抑制作用会增强。令人惊讶的是,植物替代资源的可利用性降低了猎物密度,这表明杂食动物的捕食随着植物替代资源的增加而增加。这种差异(植物替代资源不仅降低了杂食动物的捕食率,还降低了猎物密度)是由于杂食动物种群对植物替代资源的响应能力在实验上存在差异。在存在植物替代资源的情况下,允许杂食动物种群做出响应会降低猎物密度,而不允许种群做出响应则会增加猎物密度。由于在允许杂食动物种群做出响应时,杂食动物通常会在存在植物替代资源的情况下抑制猎物密度, 因此生物防治的有效性可能取决于此类资源的可利用性以及对种群响应的促进作用。