Sigma xi showcase

27
COMPETITION AND COEXISTENCE BETWEEN A MIGRANT AND RESIDENT BIRD DURING THE NON-BREEDING SEASON Kathryn Peiman, PhD candidate UCLA Dept of EEB

Transcript of Sigma xi showcase

Page 1: Sigma xi showcase

COMPETITION AND COEXISTENCE BETWEEN A MIGRANT AND RESIDENT

BIRD DURING THE NON-BREEDING SEASON

Kathryn Peiman, PhD candidateUCLA Dept of EEB

Page 2: Sigma xi showcase

BackgroundComplete competitors cannot coexist

(Gause’s law)-predicts that ecologically similar species will

partition resources to reduce competitionThe idea is simple, but demonstrating that interspecific competition is currently occurring is difficult in natural populations.How can we tell whether current interactions are due to competition? And how can we separate interactions over food resources from interactions due to breeding requirements?

Page 3: Sigma xi showcase

BackgroundSolution? Birds during the non-breeding season!• no breeding requirements (only individual survival)• compare locations of sympatry

(species coexist) to allopatry (species found alone) to test whether they haveexperienced interspecific competition (selection for divergence only insympatry)

• also include ecological effects due to seasonal changes (maychange the intensity of competition)

I will test hypotheses related to three topics:• Interference competition• Exploitative competition• Physiological effects of coexistence

Allopatry

Sympatry

Page 4: Sigma xi showcase

Study speciesTBVI (resident in the Bahamas)Thick-billed vireo (Vireo crassirostris)Weight: 14.1 gBill length: 8.83 mmWing chord: 61.6 mm

WEVI (breeds in south-east US; winters in the Bahamas and Mexico)White-eyed vireo (Vireo griseus)Weight: 11.9 gBill length: 7.45 mmWing chord: 60.2 mm

Page 5: Sigma xi showcase

Study locations

Allopatric WEVI

Sympatric TBVI and WEVI Allopatric

TBVI

I visited three locations to test for evolutionary effects of species coexistence (comparing allopatry to sympatry): Abaco Island, the Bahamas (sympatry); San Salvador Island, the Bahamas (allopatric TBVI); and Los Tuxtlas,Mexico (allopatric WEVI). At each location, I tested for the ecological effectsof declining resource abundance by comparing data collected in the fall[Sept-Nov] to thewinter [Jan-Mar].

Page 6: Sigma xi showcase

Interference competitionDirect interactions between individuals over a shared,

limited resource• direct interactions can involve signalling (color, posture,

chemicals, auditory cues, etc) and fighting (biting, attacking, striking, etc)

• types of resources include mates, offspring-rearing locations (nests, burrows, holes, etc), predator-free space, environmental refuges (basking sites, moisture-rich areas), and food

-but mates are only shared if the species hybridize; offspring locations if it is during the breeding season; predator-free space if predation is a major selective pressure; and environmental refuges if individuals are vulnerable to those stresses. Food, however, is always necessary to both species.

Page 7: Sigma xi showcase

Interference competitionQuestion:

Do TBVI and WEVI engage in interference competition?

Hypotheses and predictions:1) If heterospecific aggression is beneficial, it

will be higher in individuals from sympatry compared to allopatry, while conspecific aggression will not differ.

2) If the benefits of excluding individuals outweigh the costs, territories will be mutually exlusive.

Page 8: Sigma xi showcase

Interference competition - aggression

Methods:Territory holders were color-banded for individual

recognition.I used taxidermy mounts and playback of songs/chatter to

simulate territorial intrusions.Each bird received a 3 minute trial, 3 minutes of silence,

then a second 3 minute trial. I systematically alternated the order of conspecific and heterospecific trials among territory holders to control for presentation order.

I recorded the movement (time spent within 0-2m and 2-5m of the mount, and time spent attacking the mount) and vocal responses (number of songs and chatters) of each territory holder.

Page 9: Sigma xi showcase

Interference competition - aggression

TBVI attacking mount of WEVI

Page 10: Sigma xi showcase

Interference competition - aggression

Results (using GLMMs with identity link):691 trials; 54 individual TBVI and 53 individual WEVI

responded to at least one trial.Species differences: TBVI were much more aggressive than

WEVI (attacked and spent time closer to the mount) (p<0.0001).

Intra vs interspecific aggression: Both species were more aggressive to conspecifics than heterospecifics (p<0.001).

Evolutionary effects: Both conspecific and heterospecific aggression higher in sympatry compared to allopatry for TBVI (p=0.03); no difference for WEVI.

Ecological effects: No clear season effect.

Page 11: Sigma xi showcase

Interference competition: territories

Methods: I used conspecific playback and GPS units to map the boundary of territory holders (TBVI: n=49; WEVI: n=41).Results: Conspecific territories barely overlapped (<10%), while heterospecific territories had a lot of overlap (>50%).Example of TBVI and WEVI territories in sympatry

Page 12: Sigma xi showcase

Interference competitionDo TBVI and WEVI engage in interference competition?

Yes, but it is asymmetrical and perhaps not an adaptive response

1) Heterospecific aggression AND conspecific aggression were higher in sympatry compared to allopatry. Cannot conclude whether one or both behaviors were under selection in sympatry.

2) Conspecific territories were mutually exlusive, but heterospecific territories overlapped. Surprisingly, the high levels of heterospecific aggression by TBVI towards WEVI did not result in exclusive territories.

Page 13: Sigma xi showcase

Exploitative competitionIndirect interactions between individuals over

a shared, limited resource• indirect means that individuals may never

meet or physically interact, but both consume the same resource so there is less available for individuals of the other species

• resource acquition involves detection (seeing and identification), capture (handling time) and consumption (eating it)-Food is the most common resource shared

during exploitative competition.

Page 14: Sigma xi showcase

Exploitative competitionQuestion:

Do TBVI and WEVI engage in exploitative competition?

Hypotheses and predictions:1) If resources are shared between species,

diet will diverge between individuals from sympatry compared to allopatry.

2) If rainfall affects arthropods and fruits, then the abundance of food will decline from fall to winter mirroring decreases in rainfall.

Page 15: Sigma xi showcase

Exploitative competition - diet

Methods:Clipped 2mm of claw from each

individual.Each claw was analyzed for nitrogen stable isotopes

(δN):-all individuals obtain their nitrogen from their food source, and this accumulates up the food chain-therefore, nitrogen isotopes reflect trophic level-this can separate birds eating fruit from those eating herbivorous insects (caterpillars, leaf hoppers) and those eating carnivorous arthropods (predaceous beetles, spiders)

Page 16: Sigma xi showcase

Exploitative competition - diet

Results (ANOVAs; TBVI: n=151, WEVI: n=92):Species differences: WEVI fed higher on the food

chain than TBVI (p=0.0004).Evolutionary and ecological effects: WEVI fed

higher on the food chain in the winter than the fall in symptry but did not change their diet in allopatry (p=0.002). TBVI did not

change their diet between sympatry/allopatry or from the fall to the winter.

2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50 7.002.503.003.504.004.505.005.506.006.507.007.50

Nitrogen stable isotope values in the fall

Nitr

ogen

sta

ble

isot

ope

valu

es in

the

win

ter

Individual TBVI were consistent in their diet from the fall to the winter.

Page 17: Sigma xi showcase

Exploitative competition – resource availability

Methods:Every 200m along trail conducted a 50m transect

perpendicular to the trail by collecting arthropods at two sampling points: 25m and 50m.

I used beat sheets (nylon on a PVC pipe frame) to collect all arthropods shaken from four trees at each sampling point.

I also estimated the number of fruits on all Bursera simaruba trees within 5m of

the 50m transect (both specieshave been seen to consume this fruit).

Page 18: Sigma xi showcase

Exploitative competition – resource availability

Results (repeated-measure ANOVAs; n=80 transects per season):

Ecological contrast: The number of arthropods declined from fall to winter (p=0.017). Fruit abundance did not change from fall to winter.

Evolutionary contrast: The decline in arthropod abundance was stronger in sympatry than in allopatry (p=0.042).

Page 19: Sigma xi showcase

Exploitative competitionDo TBVI and WEVI engage in exploitative competition? Yes, but it is asymmetrical.1) Diet diverged between individuals from sympatry

compared to allopatry. WEVI consumed the higher trophic levels (ie. spiders) in sympatry.

2) Abundance of food declined from fall to winter, especially in sympatry. Indicates there should be stronger competition in winter than fall. The presence of two vireo species in sympatry may have resulted in decreased food availability.

Page 20: Sigma xi showcase

Physiological effectsDirect physical interactions are costly in terms of

time away from feeding and energy expended; receving those interactions are costly for the same reasons.

Indirect interactions are costly when the more energetically favorable food is consumed by another species, leaving less desirable or less profitable food.

Therefore, both types of competition, whether interactions are adaptive or not, may result in costs. But how do you measure ‘cost’?

Page 21: Sigma xi showcase

Physiological effects - corticosterone

What is corticosterone?-hormone released in the blood in response to a stressful event-stress includes predation attempt, severe environmental weather, lack of food, etc-causes behavioral and physiological changes, including increasing activity (more likely to find food) and activating gluconeogenesis (releasing carbohydrates from muscle for energy)-if present at elevated levels for long periods, can cause individuals to lose body mass-the abundance of this hormone is a common way to assess whether an individual is ‘stressed’ and thus experiences a ‘cost’ by losing energetic reserves

Page 22: Sigma xi showcase

Physiological effectsQuestion:

Do TBVI and WEVI experience physiological costs from coexistence?

Hypotheses and predictions:1) If coexistence is stressful, both species

will have higher corticosterone and lower body mass in sympatry compared to allopatry.

2) If resource decline is stressful, both species will have higher corticosterone and lower body mass in the winter than the fall.

Page 23: Sigma xi showcase

Physiological effects - corticosterone

Methods:I bled each bird at capture (=baseline corticosterone) and after

30 minutes (=acute corticosterone).-30 minutes of handling is considered a stressful event, and elicits an increase in this hormone

I spun the blood in a centrifuge, separated the plasma from the red blood cells, then froze the plasma at -80°C until analyzed using an enzyme immunoassay kit.

Results: (ANOVAs; TBVI: n=42; WEVI: n=34)Baseline corticosterone levels were higher in sympatry than

allopatry (TBVI: p=0.024; WEVI: p=0.05).-this indicates that the presence of the heterospecific increased stress-higher corticosterone can cause increased foraging effort and the release of stored energy reserves

Page 24: Sigma xi showcase

Physiological effects – corticosterone and body mass

TBVI body mass wasnegatively related to acute corticosterone (p=0.0008).

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 8002468

1012141618

Acute plasma corticosterone concentration (ng/mL)

Body

mas

s (g

)

-the more corticosterone in your system, the more you use skeletal muscle as an energy source, resulting in lower body massBody mass also declined from the fall to the winter in TBVI (p<0.0001), but not in WEVI. Neither species showed a difference in body mass in sympatry compared to allopatry.

Page 25: Sigma xi showcase

Summary

TBVI are dominant and really aggressive towards the subordinate WEVI, yet their territories overlap.

WEVI eat different food when they coexist with TBVI, especially when resources decline.

TBVI and WEVI are more stressed when they coexist, and TBVI are stressed as resources decline.Both species experience negative effects of coexistence. This is the first time this has been demonstrated during the non-breeding season.

Page 26: Sigma xi showcase

Broader importanceWhy do we care?-as the climate changes and habitat is lost, ecologically similar

species will be forced to share smaller fragments of habitat, potentially leading to an increase in the occurrence and intensity of interspecific interactions.

-previous studies have shown that territory location, quality of diet, and physiological condition can all affect survival, and thus fitness and population processes.

-effects on individuals during the non-breeding season have been shown to carry-over to the breeding season in both migrants and residents, affecting both survival and reproduction, and thus fitness.

-microevolutionary processes: subpopulations under strong selection to adapt to conditions on the wintering ground (i.e. presence of heterospecifics) may experience a mismatch to conditions during their breeding season.

Page 27: Sigma xi showcase

AcknowledgmentsFunding:UC Mexus small grantGerace Research Center grantAOU research grantRalph Schreiber reseach grantUCLA Dept of EEB research grantsNSERC PGS fellowship

Committee:Greg GretherCatherine SugarTom SmithPeter Narins

Field/lab work:E. Rutherford, E. Quiros, M. Akresh, E. Curd, M. Rensel

Logistic support:Gerace Research CenterFriends of the EnvironmentLos Tuxtlas Research StationBEST Commission, the BahamasC. Macias Garcia, UNAM