Section 1

Preview this deck

lotka-volterra assumptions

Front

Star 0%
Star 0%
Star 0%
Star 0%
Star 0%

0.0

0 reviews

5
0
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
0

Active users

0

All-time users

0

Favorites

0

Last updated

1 year ago

Date created

Mar 1, 2020

Cards (34)

Section 1

(34 cards)

lotka-volterra assumptions

Front

- resources are limited- both intraspecific and interspecific - carrying capacities are constant - competition coefficients are constant - density dependence is linear, ratio and non-linear dependence have more complex stability properties

Back

Tilman model complimentary

Front

Back

Tilman model perfectly substitutable

Front

Back

why is it hard to see competition?

Front

-most competitive interactions are asymmetrical -interactions between resources and competitors -competition for one resource affects another -among plants you can have root and shoot competition

Back

LV Case 1: K1 > K2/B K2 < K1/a

Front

N1 moves to K1 and N2 goes extinct

Back

competitive exclusion principle

Front

complete competitors can't exist

Back

interference (competition)

Front

individuals of one species prevent access to resource of the other species (allelopathy)

Back

R^* - resource level

Front

when the net rate of population change for a species is zero ex. when vegetative growth and reproduction balance the loss rate the species experiences in a given habitat

Back

competition

Front

ecological interaction which leads to decreased population growth for both species

Back

LV species zero isoclines

Front

Back

LV Case 3: K1 < K2/B K2 < K1/a

Front

all move towards a stable equilibrium with oscillations

Back

LV Case 4: K1 > K2/B K2 > K1/a

Front

locally stable equilibria at carrying capacities and and unstable equilibrium in the middle

Back

intraguild predation

Front

when two competitors also act as mutual predator-prey ex. species both eat each others babies

Back

minimum population threshold model

Front

case 3 but with a minimum that will drag a population towards extinction if reached

Back

zero net growth isocline (ZNGI)

Front

shows levels of 2 or more resources at which the growth rate per unit biomass of a species balances its loss rate

Back

Tilman model switching

Front

Back

Tilman model hemi-essential

Front

Back

Robert Macarthur

Front

the larger the area the more species there are and the more complex the interactions

Back

Tilman model interactively essential

Front

Back

lotka-volterra competition model

Front

interspecific competition between two or more species for some limiting resource

Back

pre-emptive (competition)

Front

individuals occupy the resource (e.g. nesting sites or basking sites), thus the resource is recycled

Back

resource

Front

substance or factor than an organism consumes or occupies, and that leads to increased population growth

Back

limiting resource

Front

when a resource, or combination of resources, leads to competition

Back

exploitation (competition)

Front

pop depress each other due to shared resource utilization

Back

ecological niche

Front

n-dimensional hypervolume within which an individual can make a positive contribution to the next generation

Back

fundamental niche

Front

the entire niche a species could occupy but not necessarily does

Back

LV Case 2: K1 < K2/B K2 > K1/a

Front

N1 goes extinct and N2 moves to K2

Back

niche overlap

Front

the more similar the niche of two species are the stronger the competition should be

Back

Why won't 1 species go extinct if 2 are in competition with one another?

Front

1) densities might be suppressed so competition is not intensive enough 2) coexistence is unstable at the local scale, but regional coexistence is maintained by immigration and patch dynamics (metapopulation) 3) competitors may coexist in a stable equilibrium by resource partitioning, but they occur at lower abundances than when the competitor is absent

Back

tilman resource level hypothesis

Front

a population can only be maintained in a habitat if its growth rate > loss rate

Back

coexistence

Front

the co-occurrence of competitors despite limiting resources

Back

Tilman model perfectly essential

Front

Back

allelopathy

Front

chemical inhibition of one species by another ex. teak- tannins kill other plants around the tree but the baby teak trees

Back

realized niche

Front

the actual niche a species occupies

Back