The dynamics of arthropod predator-prey systems

1979 ◽  
Vol 46 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 303-306 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Levins
Biometrics ◽  
1979 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 901
Author(s):  
M. B. Usher ◽  
M. P. Hassell

1979 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
pp. 1278-1279
Author(s):  
David E. McCauley

1979 ◽  
Vol 65 (3) ◽  
pp. 475
Author(s):  
Armand M. Kuris ◽  
Michael P. Hassell

10.2307/4300 ◽  
1980 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 347
Author(s):  
David Rogers ◽  
Michael P. Hassell

1992 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 317-327 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yves Basset

ABSTRACTThe cohesion of the arthropod community associated with the rain forest tree Argyrodendron actinophyllum was studied in a warm subtropical rain forest in Australia. The distribution of most arthropods was contagious on the foliage of A. actinophyllum. Chewers and phloem-feeders were more clumped than epiphyte grazers and parasitoids. Arthropod predator-prey ratios were high and relatively constant over time, as revealed by measures of their activity. However, similar ratios in abundance and species-richness of arthropods foraging on foliage showed high variability in space and no consistent trends. Species associations on the foliage were difficult to predict and did not constitute either a single, well-united community or well-delimited subcommunitics. Most of the data suggest that on the foliage of A. actinophyllum, the cohesion of the arthropod community is not extremely strong. Apart from methodological constraints, possible reasons for this include the influence of host-tree phenology, and the high arthropod-diversity of the rain forest environment.


Author(s):  
Jose Valdez

Arthropod predators preying on vertebrates is generally overlooked in ecological studies, as it is not typically observed in nature and generally considered a rare event. This is likely due to the cryptic nature of these predatory events, the relatively small size of arthropods, and the difficulty in collating published data which is scattered throughout the literature. Although arthropods are known to readily hunt and consume vertebrates, very little is known about these predatory events. In this study, a systematic literature review was conducted to provide a conceptual framework, identify global patterns, and create a searchable database of arthropod preying on vertebrates. This study represents the largest global assessment of arthropod predators and vertebrate prey with over a thousand recorded observations collated from over 80 countries across every continent except Antarctica, where no arthropod predator exists. Arthropod predators were represented by six classes (insects, arachnids, centipedes, and crustaceans: Malacostraca, Ostracoda, Hexanauplia) and over 80 families. Vertebrate prey were represented by five classes (birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, fish) and 160 families. The most common prey were frogs consisting of over a third of all observations. The most commonly preyed reptiles were nearly all lizards, half of mammal prey were bats, nearly a third of fish were Cypriniformes, and half of bird prey were passerines. Spiders represented over half of all predatory events found and were the main predator for all vertebrates except birds, which were preyed mostly upon praying mantises. However, prey varied between spider families. For insects, true bugs (Hemiptera) and beetles preyed mostly on amphibians while the aquatic Odonata larvae preyed on amphibians and fish. Decapod predators were observed preying equally between reptiles, birds, and amphibians; with centipedes preying mainly on reptiles and mammals. Predation was mostly recorded from the Americas and Australia, with countries and regions varying between predator and prey groups. This study demonstrates that arthropods are indeed an overlooked predator of vertebrates. Recognizing and quantifying these predator-prey interactions is vital for identifying patterns and the potential impact of these relationships on shaping vertebrate populations and communities. Understanding the possible threat of arthropod predators may be especially important to improve the success of conservation efforts by accounting for predators which may currently be overlooked.


2001 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 333-340 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pavel Kindlmann ◽  
Anthony F.G. Dixon

2002 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 325-330 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel T. Jennings ◽  
Nancy J. Sferra

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document