de.mpg.escidoc.pubman.appbase.FacesBean
Deutsch
 
Hilfe Wegweiser Impressum Kontakt Einloggen
  DetailsucheBrowse

Datensatz

DATENSATZ AKTIONENEXPORT

Freigegeben

Zeitschriftenartikel

No evidence that stickleback spines directly increase risk of predation by an invertebrate predator

MPG-Autoren
http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/cone/persons/resource/persons73541

Mobley,  Kenyon B.
Department Evolutionary Ecology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology, Max Planck Society;

Externe Ressourcen
Es sind keine Externen Ressourcen verfügbar
Volltexte (frei zugänglich)
Es sind keine frei zugänglichen Volltexte verfügbar
Ergänzendes Material (frei zugänglich)
Es sind keine frei zugänglichen Ergänzenden Materialien verfügbar
Zitation

Mobley, K. B., Ruiz, R. C., Johansson, F., Englund, G., & Bokma, F. (2013). No evidence that stickleback spines directly increase risk of predation by an invertebrate predator. Evolutionary Ecology Research, 15(2), 189-198.


Zitierlink: http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0014-1353-B
Zusammenfassung
Background: Some populations of stickleback have a reduced number and/or relative size of spines. Hypothesis: Macroinvertebrate predators such as dragonfly larvae cause selective pressure against spines by capturing more stickleback with pelvic spines than stickleback that are spineless. Organisms: Ninespine stickleback (Pungitius pungitius) and dragonfly larvae (Aeshna grandis). Methods: We used 10 stickleback, five with pelvic spines and five with their pelvic spines removed. We put them in containers with two dragonfly larvae. Every day for 4 days we monitored how many stickleback were captured by the larvae. We repeated this experiment ten times at two different densities of fish and predators. We also developed a model to determine whether selection for spinelessness can be distinguished from drift. Results: Dragonfly larvae caught as many stickleback with spines as without. The absence of spines was not associated with a decrease in predation risk. We substituted Bayesian estimates of the selection coefficient into quantitative genetic models of allele frequency change, and the results of the models suggest that the selective advantage of spine loss is so small that its effects cannot be distinguished from drift.