Efficient harvesting of renewing resources
Efficient harvesting of renewing resources
复制标题
高效收获再生资源
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2005
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. Thomson
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kazuharu Ohashi;J. Thomson
许多觅食的动物回到觅食地收获补充资源，但很少有人知道这样做的有效策略。具有足够认知能力的动物是否可以根据过去在特定地点的经验记忆，通过改变自己的行为来提高效率？我们开发了一个模拟模型的动物收获可再生资源从孤立的补丁在不设防，竞争的情况下。我们比较了四种觅食策略：（1）随机移动，不使用任何来自过去经验的信息（2）随机移动，但遇到较低奖励后会走更长的距离（区域限制搜索）;（3）沿固定路线重复沿着移动（完全捕获）;以及（4）捕获，但是在遇到低奖励之后采样并转移到相邻的奖励块（采样和转移捕获）。在Possingham之后，我们跟踪了焦点觅食者实际收获的资源（即，奖励）和在斑块上积累的资源的现存作物。完全诱捕总是产生较少的变化，在访问之间的时间比随机搜索或区域限制搜索，这有三个好处：增加收获的奖励作物，如果资源更新非线性，减少资源现存作物的补丁，并减少每个补丁奖励作物的变化。此外，完全捕获所产生的系统化的再访时间表使其更具竞争力，无论是资源更新时间表还是竞争者频率。通过响应他们过去的经验，使用采样和转移诱捕，觅食者只有在栖息地中的许多补丁未被访问时才受益。否则，采样和移位陷阱的探索性组件会增加访问之间的移动距离和经过时间的变化，使其比完全陷阱成本更高。因此，诱捕通常是有益的，但觅食者应该根据周围情况的时间变化，在“不耐烦”（采样和转移诱捕）和“顽强”（完全诱捕）诱捕之间切换。版权所有2005年。
Many foraging animals return to feeding sites to harvest replenishing resources, but little is known about efficient tactics for doing this. Can animals with adequate cognitive abilities increase their efficiency by modifying their behavior according to memories of past experience at particular sites? We developed a simulation model of animals harvesting renewable resources from isolated patches in undefended, competitive situations. We compared four foraging tactics: (1) moving stochastically without using any information from past experiences (random searching); (2) moving stochastically, but going longer distances after encountering lower reward (area-restricted searching); (3) repeatedly moving along a fixed route (complete traplining); and (4) traplining, but sampling and shifting to neighboring rewarding patches after encountering low reward (sample-and-shift traplining). Following Possingham, we tracked both the resources actually harvested by a focal forager (i.e., rewards) and the standing crops of resources that accumulated at patches. Complete traplining always produces less variation in elapsed time between visits than random searching or area-restricted searching, which has three benefits: increasing the reward crop harvested, if resource renews nonlinearly; reducing resource standing crop in patches; and reducing variation in reward crop per patch. Moreover, the systematic revisitation schedule produced by complete traplining makes it more competitive, regardless of resource renewal schedule or competitor frequency. By responding to their past experiences, using sample-and-shift traplining, foragers benefit only when many patches are left unvisited in the habitat. Otherwise, the exploratory component of sample-and-shift traplining, which increases the movement distance and the variation in elapsed time between visits, makes it more costly than complete traplining. Thus, traplining will usually be beneficial, but foragers should switch between "impatient" (sample-and-shift traplining) and "tenacious" (complete traplining) traplining, according to temporal changes in surrounding situations. Copyright 2005.