IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v16y2005i5p845-855.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The mechanisms of interference competition: two experiments on foraging waders

Author

Listed:
  • Wouter K. Vahl
  • Jaap van der Meer
  • Franz J. Weissing
  • Diederik van Dullemen
  • Theunis Piersma

Abstract

Models of population dynamics that include interference competition have often been applied to foraging waders and less so to other foragers, even though these models are, in principle, generally applicable. At present, however, it is still unclear whether interference competition is of importance for foraging waders. To support this idea experimental evidence and knowledge of the mechanisms underlying interference effects are required. We experimentally determined the relationship between forager density and foraging success in two wader species: the red knot (Calidris canutus) and the ruddy turnstone (Arenaria interpres). With each of the two species, we conducted an experiment consisting of 300 one-min trials. In these trials we scored the behavior and the foraging success of focal individuals at specific combinations of bird and prey density. Irrespective of prey density, individuals of both species discovered fewer prey items at higher bird densities. Despite this, only in turnstones did intake rates decline with increasing bird density. Knots compensated for a lower prey-discovery rate by rejecting fewer prey items at higher bird densities. In knots, bird density had a complex, nonmonotonic effect on the time spent vigilant and searching. In turnstones the main effect of increased bird density was a reduction in the prey-encounter rate, that is, the reward per unit search time. Effects on the time spent vigilant and the time spent searching were less pronounced than in knots. Thus, the mechanistic basis of the effects of bird density was complex for each of the two species and differed between them. Copyright 2005.

Suggested Citation

  • Wouter K. Vahl & Jaap van der Meer & Franz J. Weissing & Diederik van Dullemen & Theunis Piersma, 2005. "The mechanisms of interference competition: two experiments on foraging waders," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 16(5), pages 845-855, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:16:y:2005:i:5:p:845-855
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/ari073
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Castillo-Alvino, Hamlet Humberto & Marvá, Marcos, 2022. "Group defense promotes coexistence in interference competition: The Holling type IV competitive response," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 198(C), pages 426-445.
    2. Jutta Leyrer & Tamar Lok & Maarten Brugge & Anne Dekinga & Bernard Spaans & Jan A. van Gils & Brett K. Sandercock & Theunis Piersma, 2012. "Small-scale demographic structure suggests preemptive behavior in a flocking shorebird," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 23(6), pages 1226-1233.
    3. Allert Imre Bijleveld & Eelke Olov Folmer & Theunis Piersma, 2012. "Experimental evidence for cryptic interference among socially foraging shorebirds," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 23(4), pages 806-814.
    4. Rappoldt, Cornelis & Stillman, Richard A. & Ens, Bruno J., 2010. "A geometrical model for the effect of interference on food intake," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(2), pages 147-151.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:16:y:2005:i:5:p:845-855. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.