2018:groups:g6:start
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
2018:groups:g6:start [2018/01/11 10:00] – [Introduction] mendes | 2018:groups:g6:start [2024/01/09 18:45] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
**Group 6** | **Group 6** | ||
- | ====== | + | ====== |
Wiki site of the practical exercise of the [[http:// | Wiki site of the practical exercise of the [[http:// | ||
Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
When predation risk is high, many prey species employ defence mechanisms that potentially reduce their chances of being consumed. These mechanisms can involve shifts in the morphology, physiology, life-history and/or behaviour of prey species. These so-called //inducible defences// can have major effects on the dynamics of interacting species. | When predation risk is high, many prey species employ defence mechanisms that potentially reduce their chances of being consumed. These mechanisms can involve shifts in the morphology, physiology, life-history and/or behaviour of prey species. These so-called //inducible defences// can have major effects on the dynamics of interacting species. | ||
- | Kratina et al. (2010) studied the dynamics of an experimental food web consisting of the unicellular algae // | + | Kratina et al. (2010) studied the dynamics of an experimental food web consisting of the unicellular algae // |
+ | {{: | ||
+ | The presence of predatory flatworms induces a change in morphology of // | ||
- | {{:2018: | + | //Figure: Normal and induced morphs of //Euplotes octocarinatus// |
- | The goal of this assigment is to study the effects of inducible defences on the dynamics of intraguild predation. | ||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | This system is an instance of one of the basic three-species community modules: // | ||
- | {{ : | ||
- | **Fig. 1.** The intraguild predation community module. | ||
- | Intraguild predation is one of the basic three species community modules. It is composed of two consumers that share a common resource and one of the consumers (the intraguild predator) can prey on its competitor (the intraguild prey). | ||
===== Assignment ===== | ===== Assignment ===== | ||
- | Develop | + | Develop |
- | ===== Extension | + | ===== Questions and suggestions |
- | + | * Do inducible defences enhance the persistence of the intraguild prey? What are the conditions or parameter values that allow persistence? | |
- | It is quite reasonable to assume that induced morphs individuals might have a decreased foraging efficiency, as pointed out in Kratina et al (2010). What are the effects of this trade-off in the dynamics? | + | |
+ | ==== Challenge ==== | ||
+ | * Inducible defences are not free: they incur extra developmental costs. Assuming a small cost, is it advantageous to have these defences? That is, could it be better to be always small or always big? Under what circumstances? | ||
===== Reference ===== | ===== Reference ===== |
2018/groups/g6/start.1515664809.txt.gz · Last modified: 2024/01/09 18:45 (external edit)