Skip Navigation


Behavioral Ecology Advance Access originally published online on February 7, 2008
Behavioral Ecology 2008 19(3):552-557; doi:10.1093/beheco/arm164
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Lay Summary
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
19/3/552    most recent
arm164v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Binckley, C.A.
Right arrow Articles by Resetarits, W.J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Binckley, C.A.
Right arrow Articles by Resetarits, W.J., Jr
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Oviposition behavior partitions aquatic landscapes along predation and nutrient gradients

C.A. Binckleya and W.J. Resetarits, Jrb

a Department of Biological Sciences, Old Dominion University Norfolk, VA 23529, USA b School of Biological Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton SO16 7PX, UK

Address correspondence to C.A. Binckley. E-mail: cbinckle{at}odu.edu.


  Abstract

That individuals attempt to minimize the ratio of mortality risk/growth rate (µ/g) when foraging within individual habitat patches is well established. Do species partition among spatially discrete communities embedded in complex landscapes in a similar manner? We investigated how 3 ovipositing species (2 Hyla treefrogs and a hydrophilid beetle, Tropisternus lateralis) responded to simultaneous gradients of nutrients and predation risk. Species partitioned our experimental metacommunity primarily by reducing oviposition with fish. Tropisternus positively responded to increased nutrients, but the effect decreased with increasing risk, as predicted by µ/g theory. Use of fish habitats by Tropisternus was unrelated to breeding intensity. In contrast, Hyla showed no nutrient response but oviposited with fish only on nights with high breeding activity. Behavioral responses to the spatial distribution of resources and risk among discrete patches generated substantial variation in habitat-specific colonization rates, which has been identified as a primary mechanism generating both community and metacommunity structure.

Key words: colonization, dispersal, habitat selection, minimize µ/g, oviposition, predation risk.

Received 17 August 2007; revised 28 November 2007; accepted 26 December 2007.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.