Population cycles in the pine looper moth: Dynamical tests of mechanistic hypotheses
Population cycles in the pine looper moth: Dynamical tests of mechanistic hypotheses
复制标题
DOI：
10.1890/03-4056
复制
发表时间：
2005-05-01
影响因子：
6.1
通讯作者：
Turchin, P
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kendall, BE;Ellner, SP;Turchin, P
森林害虫小菜蛾(Bupalus Piniarius)是自然种群循环的经典例子。就像典型的种群在密度上表现出规则的振荡一样，有几种生物学机制被认为是造成这种周期的原因；但尽管经过几十年的详细研究，对于哪种机制最重要还没有明确的结论。我们评估了有直接实验证据的三个假说：(1)食物质量(松针的营养价值受落叶影响)；(2)寄生蜂(与专业寄生蜂的营养相互作用)；(3)母体效应(母体大小影响后代的表现)。我们回顾了每个假说的经验证据，并以机械动力学模型的形式表达了每个假说。我们使用一种非线性预测方法将每个模型与英国呈现一定程度规则周期的三个长期人口时间序列进行拟合，并使用参数Bootstrap来评估模型之间对数据的拟合优度的差异的显著性。三种森林的结果不同：在卡尔宾，寄生蜂和母体效应模型拟合得同样好；在Roseisle，食物质量和母体效应模型拟合得同样好；在Tentsmuir，寄生蜂模型最适合。然而，最适合的寄生模型要求寄生率在一个周期内在近0到近1之间变化，大大超过了田间观察到的寄生率范围。相反，可观察到的母体质量变量(蛹质量)的所需变异在经验观察的范围内。在对寄生率的温和限制下(尽管允许的范围比在任何地点测量到的细颈圆锥虫的范围要大得多)，寄生率模型的适合性急剧下降。然后，母体效应模型得到了一致的强有力的支持，在所有三个地点的表现都好于受限寄生模型，在两个地点的表现优于食物质量模型；它在其余地点的表现略好于食物质量模型。这是第一个人口周期的母体效应假说得到了强有力的生物学和动力学证据支持的系统。
The forest insect pest Bupalus piniarius (pine looper moth) is a classic example of a natural population cycle. As is typical for Populations that exhibit regular oscillations in density, there are several biological mechanisms that are hypothesized to be responsible for the cycles; but despite several decades of detailed study there has been no definite conclusion as to which mechanism is most important. We evaluated three hypotheses for which there was direct experimental evidence: (1) food quality (nutritional value of pine needles affected by defoliation); (2) parasitoids (trophic interactions with specialist parasitoids), and (3) maternal effects (maternal body size affects the performance of offspring). We reviewed the empirical evidence for each of these hypotheses and expressed each hypothesis in the form of a mechanistic dynamic model. We used a nonlinear forecasting approach to fit each model to three long-term Population time series in Britain that exhibit some degree of regular cycling, and we used parametric bootstrap to evaluate the significance of differences between models in their goodness of fit to the data. The results differed among the three forests: at Culbin, the parasitoid and maternal effects models fit equally well; at Roseisle, the food quality and maternal effects models fit equally well; and at Tentsmuir, the parasitoid model fit best. However, the best-fit parasitism models required that the parasitism rate vary between nearly 0 and nearly 1 during a cycle, greatly exceeding the range of parasitism rates that have been observed in the field. In contrast, the required variation in the observable maternal quality variable (pupal mass) was within the range of empirical observations. Under mild constraints on the parasitism rate (though allowing a much wider range than has been measured in B. piniarius at any location), the fit of the parasitism model fell off dramatically. The maternal effects model then had uniformly strong support, outperforming the constrained parasitism model at all three sites and the food quality model at two; it performed slightly better than the food quality model at the remaining site. This represents the first system in which the maternal effects hypothesis for population cycles has been supported by both strong biological and dynamical evidence.