No Cover Image

Journal article 1251 views

The form of direct interspecific competition modifies secondary extinction patterns in multi-trophic food webs

Mike Fowler Orcid Logo

Oikos, Volume: 122, Pages: 1730 - 1738

Swansea University Author: Mike Fowler Orcid Logo

Full text not available from this repository: check for access using links below.

DOI (Published version): 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2013.00346.x

Abstract

Forcibly removing species from ecosystems has important consequences for the remaining assemblage, leading to changes in community structure, ecosystem functioning and secondary (cascading) extinctions. One key question that has arisen from single- and multi-trophic ecosystem models is whether the s...

Full description

Published in: Oikos
Published: 2013
Online Access: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0706.2013.00346.x/abstract
URI: https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa16565
first_indexed 2013-12-13T03:03:01Z
last_indexed 2018-02-09T04:49:19Z
id cronfa16565
recordtype SURis
fullrecord <?xml version="1.0"?><rfc1807><datestamp>2013-12-12T13:02:30.5369026</datestamp><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>16565</id><entry>2013-12-12</entry><title>The form of direct interspecific competition modifies secondary extinction patterns in multi-trophic food webs</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>a3a29027498d4b43a3f082a0a5ba16b4</sid><ORCID>0000-0003-1544-0407</ORCID><firstname>Mike</firstname><surname>Fowler</surname><name>Mike Fowler</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2013-12-12</date><deptcode>BGPS</deptcode><abstract>Forcibly removing species from ecosystems has important consequences for the remaining assemblage, leading to changes in community structure, ecosystem functioning and secondary (cascading) extinctions. One key question that has arisen from single- and multi-trophic ecosystem models is whether the secondary extinctions that occur within competitive communities (guilds) are also important in multi-trophic ecosystems? The loss of consumer&#x2013;resource links obviously causes secondary extinction of specialist consumers (topological extinctions), but the importance of secondary extinctions in multi-trophic food webs driven by direct competitive exclusion remains unknown. Here I disentangle the effects of extinctions driven by basal competitive exclusion from those caused by trophic interactions in a multi-trophic ecosystem (basal producers, intermediate and top consumers). I compared food webs where basal species either show diffuse (all species compete with each other identically: no within guild extinctions following primary extinction) or asymmetric competition (unequal interspecific competition: within guild extinctions are possible). Basal competitive exclusion drives extra extinction cascades across all trophic levels, with the effect amplified in larger ecosystems, though varying connectance has little impact on results. Secondary extinction patterns based on the relative abundance of the species lost in the primary extinction differ qualitatively between diffuse and asymmetric competition. Removing asymmetric basal species with low (high) abundance triggers fewer (more) secondary extinctions throughout the whole food web than removing diffuse basal species. Rare asymmetric competitors experience less pressure from consumers compared to rare diffuse competitors. Simulations revealed that diffuse basal species are never involved in extinction cascades, regardless of the trophic level of a primary extinction, while asymmetric competitors were. This work highlights important qualitative differences in extinction patterns that arise when different assumptions are made about the form of direct competition in multi-trophic food webs.</abstract><type>Journal Article</type><journal>Oikos</journal><volume>122</volume><paginationStart>1730</paginationStart><paginationEnd>1738</paginationEnd><publisher/><keywords/><publishedDay>31</publishedDay><publishedMonth>12</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2013</publishedYear><publishedDate>2013-12-31</publishedDate><doi>10.1111/j.1600-0706.2013.00346.x</doi><url>http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0706.2013.00346.x/abstract</url><notes/><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><department>Biosciences Geography and Physics School</department><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><DepartmentCode>BGPS</DepartmentCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><apcterm/><lastEdited>2013-12-12T13:02:30.5369026</lastEdited><Created>2013-12-12T12:58:08.6088308</Created><path><level id="1">Faculty of Science and Engineering</level><level id="2">School of Biosciences, Geography and Physics - Biosciences</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Mike</firstname><surname>Fowler</surname><orcid>0000-0003-1544-0407</orcid><order>1</order></author></authors><documents/><OutputDurs/></rfc1807>
spelling 2013-12-12T13:02:30.5369026 v2 16565 2013-12-12 The form of direct interspecific competition modifies secondary extinction patterns in multi-trophic food webs a3a29027498d4b43a3f082a0a5ba16b4 0000-0003-1544-0407 Mike Fowler Mike Fowler true false 2013-12-12 BGPS Forcibly removing species from ecosystems has important consequences for the remaining assemblage, leading to changes in community structure, ecosystem functioning and secondary (cascading) extinctions. One key question that has arisen from single- and multi-trophic ecosystem models is whether the secondary extinctions that occur within competitive communities (guilds) are also important in multi-trophic ecosystems? The loss of consumer–resource links obviously causes secondary extinction of specialist consumers (topological extinctions), but the importance of secondary extinctions in multi-trophic food webs driven by direct competitive exclusion remains unknown. Here I disentangle the effects of extinctions driven by basal competitive exclusion from those caused by trophic interactions in a multi-trophic ecosystem (basal producers, intermediate and top consumers). I compared food webs where basal species either show diffuse (all species compete with each other identically: no within guild extinctions following primary extinction) or asymmetric competition (unequal interspecific competition: within guild extinctions are possible). Basal competitive exclusion drives extra extinction cascades across all trophic levels, with the effect amplified in larger ecosystems, though varying connectance has little impact on results. Secondary extinction patterns based on the relative abundance of the species lost in the primary extinction differ qualitatively between diffuse and asymmetric competition. Removing asymmetric basal species with low (high) abundance triggers fewer (more) secondary extinctions throughout the whole food web than removing diffuse basal species. Rare asymmetric competitors experience less pressure from consumers compared to rare diffuse competitors. Simulations revealed that diffuse basal species are never involved in extinction cascades, regardless of the trophic level of a primary extinction, while asymmetric competitors were. This work highlights important qualitative differences in extinction patterns that arise when different assumptions are made about the form of direct competition in multi-trophic food webs. Journal Article Oikos 122 1730 1738 31 12 2013 2013-12-31 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2013.00346.x http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0706.2013.00346.x/abstract COLLEGE NANME Biosciences Geography and Physics School COLLEGE CODE BGPS Swansea University 2013-12-12T13:02:30.5369026 2013-12-12T12:58:08.6088308 Faculty of Science and Engineering School of Biosciences, Geography and Physics - Biosciences Mike Fowler 0000-0003-1544-0407 1
title The form of direct interspecific competition modifies secondary extinction patterns in multi-trophic food webs
spellingShingle The form of direct interspecific competition modifies secondary extinction patterns in multi-trophic food webs
Mike Fowler
title_short The form of direct interspecific competition modifies secondary extinction patterns in multi-trophic food webs
title_full The form of direct interspecific competition modifies secondary extinction patterns in multi-trophic food webs
title_fullStr The form of direct interspecific competition modifies secondary extinction patterns in multi-trophic food webs
title_full_unstemmed The form of direct interspecific competition modifies secondary extinction patterns in multi-trophic food webs
title_sort The form of direct interspecific competition modifies secondary extinction patterns in multi-trophic food webs
author_id_str_mv a3a29027498d4b43a3f082a0a5ba16b4
author_id_fullname_str_mv a3a29027498d4b43a3f082a0a5ba16b4_***_Mike Fowler
author Mike Fowler
author2 Mike Fowler
format Journal article
container_title Oikos
container_volume 122
container_start_page 1730
publishDate 2013
institution Swansea University
doi_str_mv 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2013.00346.x
college_str Faculty of Science and Engineering
hierarchytype
hierarchy_top_id facultyofscienceandengineering
hierarchy_top_title Faculty of Science and Engineering
hierarchy_parent_id facultyofscienceandengineering
hierarchy_parent_title Faculty of Science and Engineering
department_str School of Biosciences, Geography and Physics - Biosciences{{{_:::_}}}Faculty of Science and Engineering{{{_:::_}}}School of Biosciences, Geography and Physics - Biosciences
url http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0706.2013.00346.x/abstract
document_store_str 0
active_str 0
description Forcibly removing species from ecosystems has important consequences for the remaining assemblage, leading to changes in community structure, ecosystem functioning and secondary (cascading) extinctions. One key question that has arisen from single- and multi-trophic ecosystem models is whether the secondary extinctions that occur within competitive communities (guilds) are also important in multi-trophic ecosystems? The loss of consumer–resource links obviously causes secondary extinction of specialist consumers (topological extinctions), but the importance of secondary extinctions in multi-trophic food webs driven by direct competitive exclusion remains unknown. Here I disentangle the effects of extinctions driven by basal competitive exclusion from those caused by trophic interactions in a multi-trophic ecosystem (basal producers, intermediate and top consumers). I compared food webs where basal species either show diffuse (all species compete with each other identically: no within guild extinctions following primary extinction) or asymmetric competition (unequal interspecific competition: within guild extinctions are possible). Basal competitive exclusion drives extra extinction cascades across all trophic levels, with the effect amplified in larger ecosystems, though varying connectance has little impact on results. Secondary extinction patterns based on the relative abundance of the species lost in the primary extinction differ qualitatively between diffuse and asymmetric competition. Removing asymmetric basal species with low (high) abundance triggers fewer (more) secondary extinctions throughout the whole food web than removing diffuse basal species. Rare asymmetric competitors experience less pressure from consumers compared to rare diffuse competitors. Simulations revealed that diffuse basal species are never involved in extinction cascades, regardless of the trophic level of a primary extinction, while asymmetric competitors were. This work highlights important qualitative differences in extinction patterns that arise when different assumptions are made about the form of direct competition in multi-trophic food webs.
published_date 2013-12-31T06:30:53Z
_version_ 1821386005748383744
score 10.890605

Similar Items