Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Variance in ecological consumer–resource interactions

Nature volume 407, pages 370–374 (2000)Cite this article

Abstract

Food-web models use the effect size of trophic interactions to predict consumer–resource dynamics1,2,3. These models anticipate that strong effects of consumers increase spatial and temporal variability in abundance of species, whereas weak effects dampen fluctuations4,5,6. Empirical evidence indicates that opposite patterns may occur in natural assemblages7. Here I show that spatial variance in the distribution of resource populations is sensitive to changes in the variance of the trophic interaction, in addition to the mean effect of consumers, relative to other causes of spatial variability. Simulations indicate that both strong and weak direct effects of consumers can promote spatial variability in abundance of resources, but only trophic interactions with a large mean effect size can reduce variation. Predictions of the model agree with the results of repeated field experiments and are consistent with data from published consumer–resource interactions, proving to be robust across widely varying environmental conditions and species’ life histories. Thus, food-web models that embody variance in trophic interactions may have increased capacity to explain the wide range of effects of consumers documented in empirical studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Conceptual model of the effect of consumers on variation in the abundance of a resource. C, Consumers; R, resource.
Figure 2: Results of Monte Carlo simulations illustrating the effects of the variance of trophic interactions.
Figure 3: Correlation between observed and predicted effects of consumers on spatial variance of their resource.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lawton, J. H. in Ecological Concepts (ed. Cherret, J. M.) 43–78 (Blackwell Scientific, Oxford, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Paine, R. T. Food webs: linkage, interaction strength and community infrastructure. J. Anim. Ecol. 49, 667–685 (1980).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  3. Paine, R. T. Food-web analysis through field measurement of per capita interaction strength. Nature 355, 73–75 (1992).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  4. May, R. M. Stability And Complexity In Model Ecosystems (Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, 1973).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Polis, G. A. & Strong, D. R. Food web complexity and community dynamics. Am. Nat. 147, 813– 846 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. McCann, K., Hastings, A. & Huxel, G. R. 1998. Weak trophic interactions and the balance of nature. Nature 395, 794– 798 (1998).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Berlow, E. L. Strong effects of weak interactions in ecological communities. Nature 398, 330–334 ( 1999).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Fairweather, P. G. Predation can increase variability in the abundance of prey on seashores. Oikos 53, 87–92 (1988).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Taylor, R. L. Aggregation, variance and the mean. Nature 189, 732–735 (1961).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  10. Osenberg, C. W., Sernelle, O. & Cooper, S. D. Effect size in ecological experiments: the application of biological models in meta-analysis. Am. Nat. 150 , 798–812 (1997).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Sousa, W. P. Intertidal mosaics: patch size, propagule availability, and spatially variable patterns of succession. Ecology 65, 1918 –1935 (1984).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Dungan, M. L. in Predation: Direct And Indirect Impacts On Aquatic Communities (eds Karefoot, W. C. & Sih, A.) 188–220 (Univ. Press New England, Hanover, 1987).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Martin, T. H., Wright, R. A. & Crowder, L. B. Non-additive impact of blue crabs and spot on their prey assemblages. Ecology 70, 1935– 1942 (1989).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Dethier, M. & Duggins, D. Variation in strong interactions in the intertidal zone along a geographical gradient: a Washington-Alaska comparison. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 50, 97 –105 (1988).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  15. Menge, B. A., Lubchenco, J., Gaines, S. D. & Ashkenas, L. R. A test of the Menge-Sutherland model of community organization in a tropical rocky intertidal food web. Oecologia 71, 75–89 (1986).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  16. Lubchenco, J. et al. Structure, persistence and role of consumers in a tropical rocky intertidal community (Taboguilla Island, Bay of Panama). J. Exp. Mar. Ecol. 77, 23–73 (1984).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Berlow, E. L. & Navarrete, S. A. Spatial and temporal variation in rocky intertidal community organization: lessons from repeating field experiments. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 214, 195– 229 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Sousa, W. Experimental investigations of disturbance and ecological succession in a rocky intertidal algal community. Ecol. Monogr. 49, 227–254 (1979).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Dungan, M. L. Three-way interactions: barnacles, limpets, and algae in a sonoran desert rocky intertidal zone. Am. Nat. 127, 292 –316 (1986).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Morrison, D. Comparing fish and urchin grazing in shallow and deeper coral reef algal communities. Ecology 69, 1367–1382 (1988).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Anderson, M. J. & Underwood, A. J. Effects of gastropods grazers on recruitment and succession of an estuarine assemblage: a multivariate and univariate approach. Oecologia 109 , 442–453 (1997).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Navarrete, S. A. Variable predation: effects of whelks on a mid-intertidal successional community. Ecol. Monogr. 66, 301– 321 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Wootton, T. J. Size-dependent competition: effects on the dynamics vs. the end point of mussel bed succession. Ecology 74, 195– 206 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lubchenco, J. & Menge, B. A. Community development and persistence in a low rocky intertidal zone. Ecol. Monogr. 48, 67–94 (1978).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Menge, B. A. et al. The keystone species concept: variation in interaction strength in a rocky intertidal habitat. Ecol. Monogr. 64, 249–286 (1994).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Sanford, E. Regulation of keystone predation by small changes in ocean temperature. Science 283, 2095–2097 ( 1999).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Benedetti-Cecchi, L. Predicting direct and indirect interactions during succession in a midlittoral rocky shore assemblage. Ecol. Monogr. 70, 45–72 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Underwood, A. J. in Frontiers Of Population Ecology (eds Floyd, R. B., Sheppard, A. W. & De Barro, P. J.) 369–389 (CSIRO, Melbourne, 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Smith, S. V. & Buddemeier, R. W. Global change and coral reef ecosystems. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 23, 89 –118 (1992).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Menconi, M., Benedetti-Cecchi, L. & Cinelli, F. Spatial and temporal variability in the distribution of algae on rocky shores in the northwest Mediterranean. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 233, 1–23 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I thank M. J. Anderson and F. Micheli for helpful comments on the manuscript. F. Bulleri, I. Bertocci and M. Menconi provided invaluable assistance in the field. This research was supported by the European Community and by a grant from the University of Pisa.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Scienze dell’Uomo e dell’Ambiente, Via A. Volta 6, Pisa, I-56126, Italy

    Lisandro Benedetti-Cecchi

Authors
  1. Lisandro Benedetti-Cecchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lisandro Benedetti-Cecchi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Benedetti-Cecchi, L. Variance in ecological consumer–resource interactions. Nature 407, 370–374 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1038/35030089

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/35030089

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing