Dispersal and distribution of a generalist predator in habitats with multiple food resources
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The ability to locate suitable food resources affects fitness in animals. Therefore, movements are necessary to optimize foraging in habitats where food is distributed in patches of different qualities. The aim of this work was to investigate the dispersal and distribution of females and males of the omnivorous mirid D. hesperus in mesocosms composed by food patches of different values in terms of fitness. In agreement with the Marginal Value Theorem (MVT) and the Ideal Free Distribution (IFD), individuals were expected to aggregate in the highest quality patches. Besides, the proportion of individuals in patches was predicted to be proportional to fitness, and interference among individuals was expected to rise as the density of individuals increased. Emigration rates were predicted to be higher for low- than for high-quality patches, while the opposite was predicted for immigration. Three types of habitats each with different combinations of food resources were tested: (1) habitat including patches of tomato plants with no-prey, and patches infested with either mite or whitefly; (2) with no-prey and whitefly; (3) with no-prey and mites. Each type of habitat was set up in a tomato greenhouse compartment and replicated four times. Individuals were tracked by mark-recapture methods using luminous paintings. The number of females and males in whitefly patches was significantly higher than in mite and no-prey patches, but a significant interaction sex*habitat and sex*patch was found. In habitats with only one type of prey, D. hesperus adults fitted the IFD, while in mixed prey habitats their distribution diverged from IFD. Interference was found to be significant, with female fitness decreasing as their density increased. Emigration rates were significantly lower for whitefly patches with a significant interaction patch*sex; the opposite was found for immigration. This research shows that it is unlikely that D. hesperus forage according to the omniscient principle of IFD and MVT; in contrast, it strongly suggests that it uses some simple rules to make decisions about inter-patch movement, and emigration from habitats and patches.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».