20
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Intragroup competition predicts individual foraging specialisation in a group‐living mammal

      letter

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Individual foraging specialisation has important ecological implications, but its causes in group‐living species are unclear. One of the major consequences of group living is increased intragroup competition for resources. Foraging theory predicts that with increased competition, individuals should add new prey items to their diet, widening their foraging niche (‘optimal foraging hypothesis’). However, classic competition theory suggests the opposite: that increased competition leads to niche partitioning and greater individual foraging specialisation (‘niche partitioning hypothesis’). We tested these opposing predictions in wild, group‐living banded mongooses ( Mungos mungo), using stable isotope analysis of banded mongoose whiskers to quantify individual and group foraging niche. Individual foraging niche size declined with increasing group size, despite all groups having a similar overall niche size. Our findings support the prediction that competition promotes niche partitioning within social groups and suggest that individual foraging specialisation may play an important role in the formation of stable social groupings.

          Related collections

          Most cited references55

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The ecology of individuals: incidence and implications of individual specialization.

          Most empirical and theoretical studies of resource use and population dynamics treat conspecific individuals as ecologically equivalent. This simplification is only justified if interindividual niche variation is rare, weak, or has a trivial effect on ecological processes. This article reviews the incidence, degree, causes, and implications of individual-level niche variation to challenge these simplifications. Evidence for individual specialization is available for 93 species distributed across a broad range of taxonomic groups. Although few studies have quantified the degree to which individuals are specialized relative to their population, between-individual variation can sometimes comprise the majority of the population's niche width. The degree of individual specialization varies widely among species and among populations, reflecting a diverse array of physiological, behavioral, and ecological mechanisms that can generate intrapopulation variation. Finally, individual specialization has potentially important ecological, evolutionary, and conservation implications. Theory suggests that niche variation facilitates frequency-dependent interactions that can profoundly affect the population's stability, the amount of intraspecific competition, fitness-function shapes, and the population's capacity to diversify and speciate rapidly. Our collection of case studies suggests that individual specialization is a widespread but underappreciated phenomenon that poses many important but unanswered questions.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Intraspecific competition drives increased resource use diversity within a natural population.

            Resource competition is thought to play a major role in driving evolutionary diversification. For instance, in ecological character displacement, coexisting species evolve to use different resources, reducing the effects of interspecific competition. It is thought that a similar diversifying effect might occur in response to competition among members of a single species. Individuals may mitigate the effects of intraspecific competition by switching to use alternative resources not used by conspecific competitors. This diversification is the driving force in some models of sympatric speciation, but has not been demonstrated in natural populations. Here, we present experimental evidence confirming that competition drives ecological diversification within natural populations. We manipulated population density of three-spine sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus) in enclosures in a natural lake. Increased population density led to reduced prey availability, causing individuals to add alternative prey types to their diet. Since phenotypically different individuals added different alternative prey, diet variation among individuals increased relative to low-density control enclosures. Competition also increased the diet-morphology correlations, so that the frequency-dependent interactions were stronger in high competition. These results not only confirm that resource competition promotes niche variation within populations, but also show that this increased diversity can arise via behavioural plasticity alone, without the evolutionary changes commonly assumed by theory.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Evolution of Niche Width

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                m.a.cant@exeter.ac.uk
                harry.marshall@roehampton.ac.uk
                Journal
                Ecol Lett
                Ecol. Lett
                10.1111/(ISSN)1461-0248
                ELE
                Ecology Letters
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                1461-023X
                1461-0248
                14 March 2018
                May 2018
                : 21
                : 5 ( doiID: 10.1111/ele.2018.21.issue-5 )
                : 665-673
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Centre for Ecology and Conservation University of Exeter Penryn Campus Cornwall TR10 9FE UK
                [ 2 ] Environment and Sustainability Institute University of Exeter Penryn Campus Cornwall TR10 9FE UK
                [ 3 ] Department of Zoology School of Natural Sciences Trinity College Dublin Dublin 2 Ireland
                [ 4 ] Department of Biosciences University of Helsinki PO Box 65 (Viikinkaari 1) Helsinki FI‐00014 Finland
                [ 5 ] Centre for Research in Ecology, Evolution and Behaviour University of Roehampton London SW15 4JD UK
                Author notes
                Article
                ELE12933
                10.1111/ele.12933
                5947261
                29542220
                0d4eea5f-498e-44c5-a834-2717a2837f2b
                © 2018 The Authors. Ecology Letters published by CNRS and John Wiley & Sons Ltd

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 03 October 2017
                : 08 November 2017
                : 28 January 2018
                : 06 February 2018
                Page count
                Figures: 4, Tables: 2, Pages: 9, Words: 7863
                Funding
                Funded by: European Research Council
                Award ID: 309249
                Funded by: Natural Environment Research Council (UK)
                Award ID: NE/J010278/1
                Categories
                Letter
                Letters
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                ele12933
                May 2018
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_NLMPMC version:version=5.3.8.2 mode:remove_FC converted:11.05.2018

                Ecology
                banded mongoose,competition,foraging behaviour,foraging niche,group‐living,mungos mungo,social group,specialisation,stable isotope

                Comments

                Comment on this article