THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ABUNDANCE AND BODY-SIZE IN NATURAL ANIMAL ASSEMBLAGES
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ABUNDANCE AND BODY-SIZE IN NATURAL ANIMAL ASSEMBLAGES
复制标题
DOI：
10.2307/5201
复制
发表时间：
1993-01-01
影响因子：
4.8
通讯作者：
STORK, NE
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
BLACKBURN, TM;BROWN, VK;STORK, NE
1.根据来自许多分类群和组合的汇集数据，对动物物种体重和种群丰度之间的关系的研究表明，丰度与重量成-0.75次方(例如，Damuth 1987)。由于代谢率与体重成正比为0.75，这一结果被认为是所有物种使用等量能量的证据。然而，“能量等效性”的证据是模棱两可的，因为在许多个体组合中，丰度在重量上的比例与-0.75.2有很大不同。在这里，我们研究了九个以前未发表的动物组合和五个先前发表的有数据的组合中的体型(体重和/或长度)与丰度之间的关系，以回答三个问题：(I)组合内的大小和丰度之间的关系通常采取什么形式？(Ii)体型作为富足程度的预测指标有多好？(3)是否有证据表明群落中的物种丰富度可能受到人均能量需求的制约？3.14个群落中有12个群落的原木个体大小与原木种群丰富度呈负相关，但个体大小所解释的物种丰富度的变异比例总是很低。这种关系的情节往往是多边形的。大多数组合的回归斜率与能量约束模型的预测有很大不同：这些组合中的大多数物种不能受到能量限制。然而，组合上界斜率附近最丰富的物种可能是能量有限的，因为只有一个组合的上界斜率与能量模型预测的不同。其中两个组合是由12个亚样汇编而成的。单独测试，子样本显示出与组装本身相同的模式。我们的结论是，在自然群落中，个体大小和丰度之间的关系通常是多边形的，物种个体大小对物种丰度的预测很差。显然，组合中大多数物种的丰度并不受能量需求的限制，但组合中最常见的物种可能是。
1. Studies of the relationship between body weight and population abundance for animal species based on pooling data from many taxa and assemblages suggest that abundance scales with weight to the -0.75 power (e.g. Damuth 1987). Since metabolic rate scales with weight as (plus) 0.75, this result has been taken as evidence that all species in assemblages used equal amounts of energy. The evidence for 'energetic equivalence' is, however, equivocal, because within many individual assemblages the scaling of abundance on weight differs significantly from -0.75.2. Here, we examine the relationship between body size (weight and/or length) and abundance in nine previously unpublished animal assemblages, and five previously published assemblages for which data were available, to answer three questions: (i) What form does the relationship between size and abundance within assemblages usually take? (ii) How good is body size as a predictor of abundance? (iii) Is there evidence that species abundances in assemblages may be constrained by per capita energetic requirements?3. Twelve of the 14 assemblages show a negative relationship between log body size and log population abundance, but the proportion of variance in abundance which body size explains is always low. Plots of the relationship tend to be polygonal.4. Regression slopes for most assemblages differ significantly from the predictions of energetic constraint models: most species in these assemblages cannot be energy limited. However, the most abundant species near the upper bound slopes of assemblages may be energy limited, because in only one assemblage does the upper bound slope differ from energetic model predictions.5. Two of the assemblages were compiled from 12 subsamples. Tested individually, the subsamples show the same patterns as the assemblages themselves.6. We conclude that within natural assemblages, the relationship between body size and abundance is usually polygonal, with species body size being a very poor predictor of species abundance. Abundances of most species in assemblages are not, apparently, constrained by energetic requirements, but the commonest species in assemblages may be.