Functional response: an overview and experimental guide

Authors

  • Valeria Fernández-Arhex Laboratorio de Ecología de Insectos Forestales, INTA EEA - Bariloche, S. C. de Bariloche, Río Negro, Argentina
  • Juan C. Corley Laboratorio de Ecología de Insectos Forestales, INTA EEA - Bariloche, S. C. de Bariloche, Río Negro, Argentina

Keywords:

behavioural response, logistic regression, density-dependence, insects

Abstract

The functional response of predators is central to any description of the process of predation, and is probably the best example of the influence of the individual behaviour on the population dynamics of predator- prey interactions. The estimation of the functional response is useful because of its implications on stability, but probably more importantly because it allows appropriate estimates for predation parameters and the comparison between potential agents of biological control. There are, however, several limitations in its estimation that affect the quality of the results obtained from empirical studies and, consequently, set a limit to the biological conclusions derived from them. These involve all stages of the estimation process: the design and implementation of the experiments, the analysis of data and the model used to estimate functionalresponse parameters. Our aim in this paper is to establish a base line for the empirical study of the functional response. Throughout the paper, we set our focus on parasitoids because these insects are a classical group in studies of functional response, and also because of their importance as agents of biological control of pests. We first describe the functional response and present an overview of the main problems arising in its estimation. Then, we summarise and exemplify the procedure that allows the best estimation of the functional response. Our report differs from past attempts in that it involves all stages of the estimation process. The best protocol involves variable time experiments, because they allow the studied animals to display behaviours under a more natural scenario. Along these lines, prey patch densities should mimic natural densities and individual behaviour should be observed throughout the assay. Also, other individual traits such as the abilities to switch prey and learn must be standardised. Functional response is, after all, a behavioural study and thus careful observations allow detecting inconsistencies and flaws of the experiment and data collection. With the data, a Logistic Regression Analysis is appropriate, because it allows distinguishing readily between type II and type III functional responses. Once the shape of the response is determined, appropriate model parameters may be estimated by a non-linear least squares procedure. We finally illustrate this protocol, providing analysis details in an appendix, with a study of the functional response of the parasitoid Ibalia leucospoides.

References

BEGON, M; JL HARPER & CR TOWNSEND. 1995. Ecología: individuos, poblaciones y comunidades. Ed. Omega. Barcelona.

BERNSTEIN, C. 2000. Host-parasitoid models: the story of successful failure. Pp. 41-57 en: M Hochberg & A Ives (eds). Population biology of host-parasitoid interactions. Princeton University Press. Princeton.

BERRYMAN, AA. 1999. The theoretical foundations of biological control. Pp. 3-21 en: BA Hawkins & HV Cornell (eds). Theoretical approaches to biological control. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

BURNETT, T. 1958a. Effect of host distribution on the reproduction of Encarsia formosa Gahan (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea). Can. Entomol. 90:179-191.

BURNETT, T. 1958b. Effect of area of search on reproduction of Encarsia formosa Gahan (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea). Can. Entomol. 90:225-229.

CASAS, J & B HULLINGER. 1994. Statistical analysis of functional response experiments. Biocontrol Sci. Techn. 4:133-145.

CHEKE, RA. 1974. Experiments on the effect of host spatial distribution on the numerical response of parasitoids. J. Anim. Ecol. 43:107-114.

CHESSON, P & M ROSENZWEIG. 1991. Behaviour, heterogeneity, and the dynamics of interacting species. Ecology 72:1187-1195.

COLLINS, MD; SA WARD & AFG DIXON. 1981. Handling time and the functional response of Aphelinus thomsoni, a predator and parasite of the aphid Drepanosiphum platanoidis. J. Anim. Ecol. 50:479-487.

COOK, RM & SF HUBBARD. 1977. Adaptative searching strategies in insect parasites. J. Anim. Ecol. 46:115-125.

FERNÁNDEZ-ARHEX, V & JC CORLEY. 2003. The functional response of parasitoids and its implications for biological control. Biocontrol Sci. Techn. 13:403-413.

GETZ, WM & NJ MILLS. 1997. Host-parasitoid coexistence and egg-limited encounterrates. Am. Nat. 148:333-347.

GRIFFITHS, KJ. 1969. The importance of coincidence in the functional and numerical responses of two parasites of the European pine sawfly, Neodiprion sertifer. Can. Entomol. 101:673-713.

GULLAN, PJ & PS CRANSTON. 2000. The insects: an outline of Entomology. 2da edn. Blackwell Science. Carleton.

HASSELL, MP. 1978. The dynamics of arthropod predator-prey systems. Princeton University Press, Princeton.

HASSELL, MP. 2000. The spatial and temporal dynamics of host-parasitoid interactions. Oxford University Press. Oxford.

HASSELL, MP; JH LAWTON & JR BEDDINGTON. 1977. Sigmoid functional responses by invertebrate predators and parasitoids. J. Anim. Ecol. 46:249-262.

HASSELL, MP & RM MAY. 1973. Stability in host– parasite models. J. Anim. Ecol. 42:693-726.

HASSELL, MP & RM MAY. 1974. Aggregation in predators and insect parasites and its effect on stability. J. Anim. Ecol. 43:567-594.

HERTLEIN, MB & K THORARINSSON. 1987. Variable patch times and the functional response of Leptopilina boulardi (Hymenoptera: Eucoilidae). Environ. Entomol. 16:593-598.

HOLLING, CS. 1959. Some characteristics of simple types of predation and parasitism. Can. Entomol. 91:385-398.

HOLLING, CS. 1965. The functional response of predators to prey density and its role in mimicry and population regulation. Mem. Entomol. Soc. Can. 45:3-60.

HOLLING, CS. 1966. The functional response of invertebrate predators to prey density. Mem. Entomol. Soc. Can. 48:1-86.

HOUCK, MA & RE STRAUSS. 1985. The comparative study of functional responses: experimental design and statistical interpretation. Can. Entomol. 117:617-629.

IVLEV, VS. 1961. Experimental ecology of the feeding of fishes. Yale University Press. New Haven.

JULIANO, S.A. 1993. Nonlinear curve fitting: predation and functional response curves. Pp. 159-182 en: SM Scheiner & J Gurevitch (eds). Design and analysis of ecological experiments. Chapman & Hall, Nueva York.

JULIANO, SA & FM WILLIAMS. 1987. A comparison of methods for estimating the functional response parameters of the random predator equation. J. Anim. Ecol. 56:641-653.

VAN LENTEREN, JC & K BAKKER. 1976. Functional responses in invertebrates. Neth. J. Zool. 26:567-572.

VAN LENTEREN, JC & K BAKKER. 1978. Behavioural aspects of the functional responses of a parasite (Pseudeucoila bochei Weld) to its host (Drosophila melanogaster). Neth. J. Zool. 28:213-233.

LIVDHAL, TP. 1979. Evolution and handling time: the functional response of a predator to the density of sympatric and allopatric strains of prey. Evolution 33:765-768.

LIVDHAL, TP & AE STIVEN. 1983. Statistical difficulties in the analysis of predator functional response data. Can. Entomol. 115:1365-1370.

MADDEN, JL & D PIMENTEL. 1965. Density and spatial relationships between a wasp parasite and its housefly host. Can. Entomol. 97:1031-1037.

MANLY, BFJ & CD JAMIENSON. 1999. Functional response and parallel curve analysis. Oikos 85:523–528.

MORRISON, G. 1986. “Searching time aggregation” and density dependent parasitism in a laboratory host-parasitoid interaction. Oecologia 68:298-303.

MURDOCH, WW & A OATEN. 1975. Predation and population stability. Adv. Ecol. Res. 9:1-131.

NICHOLSON, AJ & VA BAILEY. 1935. The balance of animal populations. Part 1. P. Zool. Soc. Lond. 3:551-598.

OATEN, A. 1977. Optimal foraging in patches: a case for stochasticity. Theor. Popul. Biol. 12:263-285.

OATEN, A & WW MURDOCH. 1975. Functional response and stability in predator–prey systems. Am. Nat. 109:289-298.

O ́NEIL, RJ. 1989.Comparison of laboratory and field measurements of the functional response of Podisus maculaventris (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae). J. Kansas Entomol. Soc. 62:148-155.

ROGERS, D. 1972. Random search and insect population models. J. Anim. Ecol. 41:369-383.

ROYAMA, T. 1971. A comparative study of models for predation and parasitism. Res. Popul. Ecol. 1:1-91.

SAS INSTITUTE INC. 1999. SAS ® system for Microsoft ® Windows ®, v. 8.0 (TSMO). SAS Institue Inc. Cary.

SOLOMON, JE. 1949. The natural control of animal populations. J. Anim. Ecol. 18:1-35.

THOMPSON, DJ. 1975. Towards a predator–prey model incorporating age structure: effects of predator and prey size on the predation of Daphnia magna by Ischnura elegans. J. Anim. Ecol. 44:907-916.

THOMPSON, WR. 1930. The utility of mathematical methods in relation to work on biological control. Ann. Appl. Biol. 17:641-648.

TREXLER, JC; CE MCCULLOGH & J TRAVIS. 1988. How can the functional response best be determined? Oecologia 76:206-214.

WALDE, SJ & WW MURDOCH. 1988. Spatial density dependence in parasitoids. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 33:441-446.

WILLIAMS, FM & SA JULIANO. 1985. Further difficulties in the analysis of functional response experiments and a resolution. Can. Entomol. 117:631-640.

Published

2004-06-01

How to Cite

Fernández-Arhex, V., & Corley, J. C. (2004). Functional response: an overview and experimental guide. Ecología Austral, 14(1), 083–093. Retrieved from https://ojs.ecologiaaustral.com.ar/index.php/Ecologia_Austral/article/view/1525

Issue

Section

Teaching tools