| |
The relationship between predators and their prey is an intricate and
complicated relationship; covering a great area of scientific knowledge. This paper will
examine the different relationships between predator and prey; focusing on the symbiotic
relations between organisms, the wide range of defense mechanisms that are utilized by
various examples of prey, and the influence between predators and prey concerning
evolution and population structure.
Symbiosis is the interaction between organisms forming a long term
relationship with each other. Many organisms become dependent on others and they need one
another or one needs the other to survive. Symbiotic interactions include forms of
parasitism, mutualism, and commensalism.
The first topic of discussion in symbiosis is parasitism. Parasitism is
when the relationship between two animal populations becomes intimate and the individuals
of one population use the other population as a source of food and can be located in or on
the host animal or animal of the other population(Boughey 1973). No known organism escapes
being a victim of parasitism(Brum 1989).
Parasitism is similar to preditation in the sense that the parasite
derives nourishment from the host on which it feeds and the predator derives nourishment
from the prey on which it feeds(Nitecki 1983). Parasitism is different from most normal
predator prey situations because many different parasites can feed off of just one host
but very few predators can feed on the same prey(1973). In parasite-host relationships
most commonly the parasite is smaller than the host. This would explain why many parasites
can feed off of one single host. Another difference in parasite-host relationships is that
normally the parasite or group of parasites do not kill the host from feeding, whereas a
predator will kill its prey(1983). Efficient parasites will not kill their host at
least until their own life cycle has been completed(1973). The ideal situation for a
parasite is one in which the host animal can live for a long enough time for the parasite
to reproduce several times(Arms 1987).
Parasites fall under two different categories according to where on the
host they live. Endoparasites are usually the smaller parasites and tend to live inside of
the host(1973). These internal parasites have certain physiological and anatomical
adaptations to make their life easier(1987). An example of this is the roundworm, which
has protective coating around its body to ensure that it will not be digested. Many
internal parasites must have more than one host in order to carry out reproduction(1989).
A parasite may lay eggs inside the host it is living in, and the eggs are excreted with
the hosts feces. Another animal may pick up the eggs of the parasite through eating
something that has come into contact with the feces.
The larger parasites tend to live on the outside of the host and are
called ectoparasites(1973). The ectoparasites usually attach to the host with special
organs or appendages, clinging to areas with the least amount of contact or
friction(1973). Both endo and ectoparasites have the capability of carrying and passing
diseases from themselves to hosts and then possibly to predators of the host(1973). One
example of this is the deer tick which can carry lyme disease and pass it on to humans or
wildlife animals. The worst outbreaks of disease from parasites usually occur when a
certain parasite first comes into contact with a specific population of hosts(1975). An
example of these ramifications would be the onset of the plague.
Many parasites are unsuccessful and have a difficult time finding food
because appropriate hosts for certain parasites may be hard to find(1987). To compensate
for low survival rates due to difficulty in finding a host, many parasites will lay
thousands or millions of eggs to ensure that at least some of them can find a host and
keep the species alive(1987). The majority of young parasites do not find a host and tend
to starve to death. Parasites are also unsuccessful if they cause too much damage to their
host animal(1987). Parasites are what is called host specific, this means that their
anatomy, metabolism, and life-style is adapted to that of their host(1973).
Some parasites react to the behavior of their hosts, an interaction
called social parasitism(1989). More simply put a parasite might take advantage of the
tendencies of a particular species for the benefit of its own. An example of this is
the European Cuckoo. In this case the grown cuckoo destroys one of the host birds eggs and
replaces it with one of its own(1991). The host bird then raises the cuckoo nestling
even when the cuckoo is almost too large for the nest and much bigger than the host
bird(1991). This is a case where the parasite uses the host to perform a function and
making life and reproduction easier on itself.
Parasite and host relationships hold an important part of homeostasis
in nature.(1975). Parasitism is an intricate component in the regulation of population of
different species in nature.
Mutualism is another topic at hand in discussing predator-prey
relationships.
Mutualism is a symbiotic relationship in which both members of the association
benefit(1989). Mutualistic interaction is essential to the survival or reproduction of
both participants involved(1989). The best way to describe the relationships of mutualism
is through examples. We will give examples of mutualism from different environments.
Bacteria that lives inside mammals and in their intestinal tract
receive food but also provide the mammals with vitamins that can be synthesized(1975).
Likewise termites whose primary source of food is the wood that they devour, would not be
able to digest the food if it was not for the protozoans that are present in their
intestinal tract(Mader 1993). The protozoans digest the cellulose that the termites cannot
handle. Mycorrhizae which are fungal roots have a mutualistic symbiotic relationship with
the roots of plants(1989). The mycorrhizae protect the plants roots and improve the uptake
of nutrients for the plant, in exchange the mycorrhizae receives carbohydrates from the
plant.
Mutualistic partners have obtained many adaptations through
coevolution. Coevolution has led to a synchronized life cycle between many organisms and
through mutualism many organisms have been able to coincide together as a working unit
rather than individuals.
Commensalism is a relationship in which one species benefits from
another species that is unaffected(1975). For instance several small organisms may live in
the burrows of other larger organisms at no risk or harm to the larger organisms. The
smaller organisms receive shelter and eat from the larger organisms excess food supply.
An example of commensalism is a barnacles relationship with a
whale. The barnacles attach themselves to the whale and they are provided with both a home
and transportation. Another example are the Remoras which are fish that attach themselves
to the bellies of sharks by a suction cup dorsal fin. The Remora fish gets a free ride and
can eat the remains of a sharks meals. Clownfish are protected from predators by seeking
refuge in the tentacles of sea anemones. Most other fish stay away because the anemones
have poison that does not affect the clownfish, therefore the clownfish is safe.
Commensalism consists of dominant predators and opportunistic organisms
that feed off of the good fortune of the larger predators. Another topic concerning
predator prey relationships is the defense mechanisms that are necessary for prey to
outwit their predators.
In order for an animal to sustain life, it must be able to survive
among the fittest of organisms. An animals anti-predatory behavior determines how long it
can survive in an environment without becoming some other animals prey. Some key
antipredator adaptations will be described and examined .
Perhaps the most common survival strategy is hiding from ones
enemies(Alcock,1975). Predators are extremely sensitive to movement and locate their prey
by visual cues. By getting rid of these key signals, enemies(predators) are forced to
invest more time and energy looking for them. This may increase the time a prey has to
live and reproduce(1975).
Hiding is generally achieved through cryptic coloration and
behavior(1975). How effective an organisms camouflage is depends on how long an organism
can remain immobile for a long amount of time. Animals can resemble a blade of grass, a
piece of bark, a leaf, a clump of dirt, and sand or gravel. In less than 8 seconds, a
tropical flounder can transform its markings to match unusual patterns on the bottom
of their tanks in the laboratory(Adler,1996). When swimming over sand, the flounder looks
like sand, and if the tank has polka dots, the flounder develops a coat of dots(1996).
Without any serious changes, the flounder can blend surprisingly well with a wide variety
of backgrounds (Ramachandran, 1996). Behavioral aspects of camouflage in organisms include
more than just remaining motionless. An organism will blend into its background only
if it chooses the right one. When the right one is chosen, the organism will position
itself so that its camouflage will match or line-up with the background. Despite the
fact that an organism may be beautifully concealed, it may still be discovered at some
point by a potential consumer(Alcock,1975).
Detecting a predator is another antipredator adaptation that is very
useful. Some prey species have an advantage over other prey species by being able to
detect a predator before it spots them or before it gets to close to them. In order to
detect enemies in good time to take appropriate action, prey species are usually alert and
vigilant whenever they are at all vulnerable(Alcock,1975). A test was conducted in the
early 1960s at Tufts University dealing with ultrasonic sound wave that bats give
off, and the way moths can detect these soundwaves(May,1991). In most cases bats are
blind, so they rely only on their sense of hearing to help them maneuver and hunt while
flying in the dark. Also flying in the dark/nighttime, are insects, moths in this case. In
a laboratory, bats and moths were observed, and every time a moth would come close to a
bat giving off an ultrasonic signal, the moth would turn and go the opposite way(1991).
When the moth would become too close to the bat, it would perform a number of acrobatic
maneuvers such as rapid turns, power dives, looping dives, and spirals(1991).
Detection by groups of animals will usually benefit the whole group
formation. By foraging together several animals may increase the chance that some
individual in the herd, flock, or covey will detect a predator before it is too
late(Alcock,1975). Each individual benefits from the predator detection and alarm behavior
of the others, which will increase the probability that it will be able to get away.
There is always a chance that prey will be chased by a predator.
Evading predators is sometimes necessary for an organism to employ, to make sure they will
not be captured when being pursued. Outrunning an enemy is the most obvious evasion
tactic(Alcock,1975). When a deer or antelope is being chased, they dont just run in
one direction to flee, they alter their flight path. The prey will demonstrate erratic and
unpredictable movements(1975). The deer or antelope may zig and zag across a savanna to
make it more difficult for the predator to capture them.
Repelling predators is a strategy that can either be last chance tactic
or the primary line of defense for an organism. This attack on the predator is used drive
it away from the prey. These adaptations can be classified as (1)mechanical repellents,
(2)chemical repellents, (3)and group defenses(Alcock,1975). An example of a mechanical
repellent is sharp spines or hairs that make organisms undesirable. Some chemical
repellents involve substances that impair the predators ability to move or cause a
predator to retreat due to undesirable odor, bad taste, or poisonous properties. Groups of
organisms can also repel predators. Truly social insects utilize many ingenious group
defenses(1975). For example, soldier ants posses an acidic spray and a sticky glue to
douse their enemies with(1975). They can also chop and stab their enemies with their sharp
jaws.
One of the last types of antipredator behaviors/adaptations is mimicry.
An organism that is edible but looks like it is a bad tasting organism is known as a
Batesian mimic. A good example of this mimicry works is how birds at first were more
likely to go after the more conspicuous looking items rather than those that didnt
stand out(Adler,1996). If too many mimics exist, more predators will consume them, and
soon they will become a primary food source. Organisms that share the same style of
coloration take part in Mullerian mimicry. An example of this is the yellow and black
stripes on bees and wasps. The symbiont states that this single look helps bird-brained
predators to learn which organisms to avoid. This warning coloration in turn saves the
organisms life as well as helps the predator to avoid a distasteful, maybe even toxic
meal.
Defense mechanisms vary drastically, and change according to different
circumstances. The ability of an organism to survive depends solely on how well it can use
its defense mechanisms to prolong its life.
The next topic of discussion is the relationship between predators and
their prey. Predators and prey effect each other from day to day interactions to the
evolution of each other. Predator and prey populations move in cycles, the number of
predators will influence the number of prey and the number of prey available will
influence the population of predators. Predators and their prey also influence the
evolution of each other. Michael Brooke(1991) points out that natural selection should
favor traits that help a species survive. A general example would be the increase in speed
of potential prey. These evolutionary traits are usually followed with an evolution in the
predator. Using the increase of maximum speed as an example, evolution will favor
predators that are fast enough to continue to catch the prey. This will lead to the
evolution of a faster predator. Brooke (1991)compares the evolutionary process to an arms
race, for both sides have to keep advancing in order to stay alive.
While predator/prey populations fluctuate, it is important to note that
they operate within a cycle. In an ideal cycle, the predators and prey will establish
stable populations. Predators play a crucial role in the population of the prey. The
importance of predators can be seen in the Kaibab Plateau in Arizona(Boughey, 1968). At
the beginning of this century, 4,000 deer inhabited 727, 000 acres of land. Over the next
40 years, 814 mountain lion were removed from the area. At the same time, over 7,000
coyote were removed. When the predators were removed, the population jumped up to 100,000
deer by 1924 (Boughey, 1968). This population crashed in the next two years by 60% due to
overpopulation and disease. Without predators, the prey could not establish a stable
population and the land supported a much smaller number than the estimated carrying
capacity of 30,000 (Boughey, 1968).
The example can work in reverse; an increased number of predators
feeding on a limited number of prey can lead to the extinction of the predators. This is
the case with the ancient trilobites, these marine anthropods died 200 million years ago
in the Permian age(Carr, 1971). According to Carr, (1971)over 60 families of this animal
have been found in fossil records. This highly successful creature became extinct due to
changes in the prey population. During the Permian period, glaciation took place that
changed the availability of the trilobites food source, algae. One may conclude that the
prey population dwindled and the trilobites could no longer support themselves.
Parasite/prey relations fit under the topic of predator/prey
relationships. Parasites feed off of their prey just as predators do(Ricklefs, 1993), but
it is in the interest of the parasite to keep its host alive. In some cases, the
parasite will act so efficiently that it will lead to the death of its host, but
most parasites can achieve a balance with their hosts. Even though parasites might not
lead directly to the death of its host, it can effect the host in a variety of other
ways. A host could become weaker and not be able to compete for food or reproduce, or the
parasite could make its host less desirable to mate with, as is the case with
Drosophila nigrospiracula(the Sanoran desert fruit fly).
Michal Polak et al.(1995) conducted a study examining the effects of
Macrocheles subbadius (a Ectoparasitic mite) on the sexual selection of the fruit flies.
The mites feed off of animal dung and rotting plant tissue (Polak et al., 1995) and relies
on the fruit flies for transportation between feeding sites as well as a food source.
Polak et al. found that male flies infested with the mites had less of a chance of mating
compared to males that had never been infested. But Polak et al.(1995) also found that
once the mites were removed from the flies and the male was allowed to recover from any
damage done by the mite, the fruit fly had the same chance of mating than a male which was
never infested. This suggests that females are selective when choosing their mates.
With females choosing not to mate with males that are infected with the
mites, the evolution of the species is being affected. Males that exhibit resistance to
mites are favored, so these characteristics will be passed onto the offspring, leading to
the development of mite resistant Drosophila nigrospiracula. There are several theories on
what basis the mites affect the males. Based on the research compiled by Polak et al.
(1995), males could be overlooked because infested males might not survive to help raise
the offspring, or males do not mate because they are weakened by the parasites and do not
perform well in contests for mates. Whatever the case, parasites have an effect on their
prey.
In a similar scenario, the parasitic relationship between cuckoos and
other birds, the development of resistance to a parasite leads to the evolution of the
parasite. This polymorphism is known as coevolution. Nitecki uses grass as a simple
example of this phenomenon(1983). Grass evolves a resistance to a strain of rust by making
a single gene substitution, and the rust counters this step with its own single gene
substitution(Nitecki, 1983). He adds that many parasites are host specific, so they are
keyed into their host and can adjust to the appropriate changes when necessary. This is
why parasites are a continual problem, not just an irritant that is rendered extinct by
one simply change in the hosts evolution.
This helps explain why the cuckoo continues to successfully lay
its eggs in the nests of Meadow Pipits, Reed Warblers, Pied Wagtails, and
Dunnocks(Brooke, 1991). According to Brooke(1991), the host birds usually are deceived by
the cuckoos egg and then raise the cuckoo chick instead of their own. By examining
the cuckoo, it is easy to see how evolution has perfected the parasitic process. According
to Brooke (1991), the cuckoo will watch its prey as it builds its nest, wait until
both parents are away from the nest, then enter the nest to remove one of the original
eggs and lay its own. Each species of cuckoo has evolved to specifically target one
of the four possible birds. According to Brooke, (1991) the Great Reed Warbler-Cuckoo will
lay an egg that is similar in size and color to the hosts, and the cuckoo has perfected
the intrusion to a science, spending about 10 seconds in the nest of its host.
The next step of parasitism comes once the cuckoo has hatched. The
process that the chick goes through is described by Brooke (1991); the chick hatches
before the rest of the clutch due to its shorter incubation period and then pushes
the other eggs out of the nest. The host family will not abandon the chick, while the
exact reason is not known, there are several theories. According to Brooke (1991), the
parents have nothing to compare the chick with or do not decide that it is too late to
raise a new clutch and will raise their adopted chick.
Brooke describes some of the tests carried out in his research (1991)
concerning the factors that influence the rejection rate of cuckoo eggs. Most birds will
not reject eggs that are similar too their eggs, but larger eggs are have a higher rate of
rejection. But if the host birds see the cuckoo in the nest, then the rate of rejection is
much increased(Brooke, 1991), which explains why cuckoos have evolved such a fast
predatory process.
Brooke shows an example of the evolutionary process at work when he
examines the Dunnocks relationship with the cuckoo(1991). The Dunnock-Cuckoo has not
developed an egg that mimics the Dunnock egg because Dunnocks accept eggs of any size and
color. Brooke (1991) believes that the Dunnock is a new species of bird under parasitism,
for only 2% of the Dunnocks are preyed upon in England. Therefore, Dunnocks have not yet
developed any defenses against the cuckoo, so the cuckoo has no need to develop any traits
to aid in parasitism. Brooke (1991) showed other examples of evolution by testing isolated
species of hosts. These birds were not as discriminating, implying that they lacked the
evolutionary advancements of detecting and rejecting parasitic eggs. The cuckoo and their
hosts are clear examples of how both the predators and they prey affect the evolution of
each other.
In some cases, predator/prey relations take place between members of
the same species. Many animals exhibit group behavior; worker bees serve the queen bee and
wolves follow an established ranking system. But when members of the same species endanger
each other for individual protection, the member of the species that faces death is being
used as prey by the member of the species surviving. Robert Heisohn describes this
relationship in lions when territorial disputes occur. The leader lion will be 50-200
meters ahead of the laggards when approaching an invading lion(Heinsohn, 1995). The leader
will face severe injury and even death while the laggards reduce their risk by staying
behind(Heinsohn, 1995). Similar behavior has been observed in many species of birds. The
hatchlings commit siblicide in order to maximize their own chances of survival as
described by Hugh Drommond et al. (1990). Drommond et al. observed cases of siblicide in
black eagles; one of the chicks is hatched usually 3 days before the other and therefore
is significantly larger than its sibling (1990). Drommond et al. observed the older
eaglet deal 1569 pecks to its younger sibling in 3 days, eventually killing the
younger chick. This phenomena supports several key concepts in evolution. The older
sibling is competing with others for resources(food and nesting space), so killing the
weaker member promotes the survival of the older bird (Drommond et al., 1990). If
resources are limited and both siblings cannot survive, the species will continue to
survive due to the death of the younger sibling. However, Drommond et al.(1990) point out
that there are several evolutionary losses that occur when a sibling dies; reproductive
potential is lost as well as a degree of insurance(in case one of the offspring does not
survive to maturity). Excuse the pun, but putting all of the eggs in one basket is a large
risk.
Predators and their prey are part of a cycle; both are necessary
components and they depend on each other for their existence. Any change made in one area
will affect the other.
Overall, predator prey relations are very complex. By breaking the
topic into the three topics of; symbiotic relationships, defense mechanisms, and the
influence relationship between predators and prey. It is important to see how all three of
these subjects tie in together. Parasitism is an example of a symbiotic relationship,
parasites are predators living off of their prey, and parasites also effect the evolution
of their hosts. Natural selection favors species that are resistant to parasites, so these
organisms evolve. The organisms have a range of defense mechanisms available in order to
protect themselves from predators. So, predators now face tougher prey, so they undergo
evolution in order to stay successful. This completes the cycle and leads to a diverse and
interesting world.
References
Adler, T. 1996. Fish Blend Quickly into the Background. Science News, 149:133.
Adler, T. 1996. How Bad-Tasting Species Got their Markings. Science News, 160:118.
Alcock, John. 1975. Animal Behavior. Sunderland, Sinauer Associates. 379-385.
Boughey, Arthur S. 1968. Ecology of Populations. New York, Macmillan Company,
89-101.
Brooke, Michael and Nicholas B. Davies. 1991. Coevolution of the Cuckoo and Its
Hosts. Scientific American, 264:92.
Brum, Gil, Larry McKane, and Gerry Karp. 1993. Biology, Exploring Life. New
York, John Wiley. 973-975.
Carr, Donald E. 1971. The Deadly Feast of Life. Garden City, Doubleday and
Company, 179-180.
Drummond, Hugh, Douglas Mock and Christopher Stinson. 1990. Avian Siblicide.
American Scientist, 78:438.
Heinsohn, Robert and Craig Packer. 1995. Complex Cooperative Strategies in Group-
Territorial African Lions. Science, 269:1260.
Mader, Sylvia S. 1993. Biology. Dubuque, Wm. C. Brown Publishers, 761-762.
May, Mike. 1991. Aerial Defense Tactics of Flying Insects. American Scientist, 79:316,
Nitecki, Matthew H. 1983. Coevolution. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1-38.
Polak, Michael and Therese A. Markow. 1995. Effect of Ectoparasitic Mites on Sexual
Selection in a Sonoran Desert Fruit Fly. Evolution, 49: 660.
Ramachandran, V.S., C.W. Tyler, R.L. Gregory, and D. Rogers-Ramachandran.
1996. Rapid Adaptive Camouflage in Tropical Flounders. Nature,
379:815.
Ricklefs, Robert E. 1993. The Economy of Nature. New York, W.H. Freeman and
Company, 322.
Turk, Jonathan, Amos Turk, Janet Wittes, and Robert Wittes. 1975. Ecosystems,
Energy, Population. Philadelphia, W.B. Saunders Company, 59-63.
--------------------------------------------------------------
|