The effect of body size on animal abundance

Microhabitat selection and co-occurrence of Pachistopelma rufonigrum Pocock (Araneae, Theraphosidae) and Nothroctenus fuxico sp. nov. (Araneae, Ctenidae) in tank bromeliads from Serra de Itabaiana, Sergipe, Brazil

Microhabitat selection and co-occurrence of Pachistopelma rufonigrum Pocock (Theraphosidae) and Nothroctenus fuxico sp. nov. (Ctenidae), in tank bromeliads were investigated. Thermal conditions, inside and outside the plants, were measured in order to verify if the temperature of the water that accumulates inside the plant affects the behavior of these species. Measurements of foliar parameters were taken in order to evaluate if and how plant structure affects spider abundance and microhabitat selection. Apparently, differences in plant structure do not affect either spider abundance or microhabitat selection. No microhabitat preference was observed and co-ocurrence of both species was a random event. In addition, notes on the distribution range of P. rufonigrum and the description of N. fuxico sp. nov. from State of Sergipe, Brazil are presented.

The scaling of animal space use

Space used by animals increases with increasing body size. Energy requirements alone can explain how population density decreases, but not the steep rate at which home range area increases. We present a general mechanistic model that predicts the frequency of interaction, spatial overlap, and loss of resources to neighbors. Extensive empirical evidence supports the model, demonstrating that spatial constraints on defense cause exclusivity of home range use to decrease with increasing body size. In large mammals, over 90% of available resources may be lost to neighbors. Our model offers a general framework to understand animal space use and sociality.

The contribution of small individuals to density-body size relationships

The relationship between density and body size is central to our understanding of species assemblages. The greatest challenge in sampling complete assemblages is obtaining reliable estimates of all taxa regardless of body size. We therefore examined the density-body size relationship in a coral reef fish assemblage using a novel sampling method which permits reliable quantification of the small/cryptic reef fish fauna. We found a negative linear relationship between density and adult body size. This is in marked contrast to the polygonal relationship previously described for other local scale assemblage studies. Our linear relationship may be a consequence of the larger differences in body size among taxa. Spanning over five orders of magnitude, the range of body sizes appears to be an important factor in shaping density-body size relationships.

Testing models of biological scaling with mammalian population densities

Two hypotheses have been suggested to explain the form of interspecific scaling of organismal characteristics to body size, such as the well-known increase in total metabolism with body mass. A hypothesis based on simple Euclidean geometry suggests that the scaling of many biological variables to body size should have a scaling exponent of 2/3, or [Formula: see text]0.667. On the other hand, according to a hypothesis based on fractal dimensions, the relationship between biological variables and body mass should have a scaling exponent of 0.750. We conducted a power analysis of the predicted exponents of scaling under the Euclidean and fractal hypotheses, using average adult body masses and population densities collected from the published literature on mammalian species. The collected data reflect 987 mammal populations from a broad variety of terrestrial habitats. Using statistical methods we determined the sample sizes required to decide between the values of the scaling exponent of the density-to-mass relationship based on the Euclidean (–0.667) and fractal (–0.750) hypotheses. Non-linearities in the dataset and insufficient power plagued our tests of the predictions. We found that mammalian species weighing less than 100 kg had a linear scaling pattern, sufficient power to reveal a difference between the scaling coefficients –0.667 and –0.750, and an actual scaling coefficient of –0.719 (barely significantly different from –0.667 but not from –0.750). Thus, our results support the fractal hypothesis, though the support was not particularly strong, which suggests that the relationship between body mass and population density should have a scaling exponent of –0.750.

Ecological community description using the food web, species abundance, and body size

Measuring the numerical abundance and average body size of individuals of each species in an ecological community's food web reveals new patterns and illuminates old ones. This approach is illustrated using data from the pelagic community of a small lake: Tuesday Lake, Michigan, United States. Body mass varies almost 12 orders of magnitude. Numerical abundance varies almost 10 orders of magnitude. Biomass abundance (average body mass times numerical abundance) varies only 5 orders of magnitude. A new food web graph, which plots species and trophic links in the plane spanned by body mass and numerical abundance, illustrates the nearly inverse relationship between body mass and numerical abundance, as well as the pattern of energy flow in the community. Species with small average body mass occur low in the food web of Tuesday Lake and are numerically abundant. Larger-bodied species occur higher in the food web and are numerically rarer. Average body size explains more of the variation in numerical abundance than does trophic height. The trivariate description of an ecological community by using the food web, average body sizes, and numerical abundance includes many well studied bivariate and univariate relationships based on subsets of these three variables. We are not aware of any single community for which all of these relationships have been analyzed simultaneously. Our approach demonstrates the connectedness of ecological patterns traditionally treated as independent. Moreover, knowing the food web gives new insight into the disputed form of the allometric relationship between body mass and abundance.

Size-abundance relationships in an Amazonian bird community: implications for the energetic equivalence rule

We studied size-abundance relationships in a species-rich Amazonian bird community and found that the slope of the logarithmic relationship between population density and bodymass (b = -0.22) is significantly shallower than expected under Damuth's energetic equivalence rule (EER), which states that population energy use (PEU) is independent of species body mass. We used estimates of avian field metabolic rates to examine the logarithmic relationship between PEU and body mass and its variation among ecological guilds. The relationship for all species had a significantly positive slope (b = 0.46), indicating that PEU of larger species was greater than that of smaller species. Analyses of guilds revealed significant variation. The slopes of the frugivore-omnivore, insectivore, and granivore guilds were all significantly positive, with that of the frugivore-omnivore guild being the steepest. In contrast, PEU did not vary significantly with species body mass among raptors. These results were confirmed, in analyses using both species values and phylogenetically independent contrasts, and the results do not support the EER in this community. The spatial distribution of resources and mechanisms of interference competition within guilds may explain why most patterns differed from the predictions of the EER. Other sources of variation, including the effects of scale, are also discussed.

The allometry of density within the space used by populations of mammalian Carnivora

The relationship between body mass and population density has been used to develop theory of how energy is used in ecosystems. The usual allometric density slope, –0.75, was reduced to near zero among species of mammalian Carnivora after Smallwood and Schonewald and Blackburn and Gaston adjusted density estimates by the sizes of the corresponding study areas. In this paper, I restricted the allometric analysis to density estimates made at or near the threshold area, which is the species-specific minimum area likely to support a population. I excluded densities estimated from subpopulations and "megapopulations", thereby removing biases of study design that had previously confused the allometry of population density. Density at threshold area declined with increasing body mass. The population's mass density did not relate to threshold area, within which carnivore species averaged 9 kg/km2. The spatial intensity of oxygen consumption did not relate to body mass, but assuming that species with smaller threshold areas occur at more locations than species with larger threshold areas, one must conclude that smaller bodied species use more energy from the environment than do larger bodied species. Furthermore, threshold area and density at threshold area were most responsive to female brain mass, which provides an ecological allometry that links spatial scale, sensory perception, parental care, life-history attributes, basal metabolic rate, and body mass.

Of mice and wrens: the relation between abundance and geographic range size in British mammals and birds

We examine the relation between population size and geographic range size for British breeding birds and mammals. As for most other assemblages studied, a strong positive interspecific correlation is found in both taxa. The relation is also recovered once the phylogenetic relatedness of species has been controlled for using an evolutionary comparative method. The slope of the relation is steeper for birds than for mammals, but this is due in large part to two species of mammals that have much higher population sizes than expected from their small geographic ranges. These outlying mammal species are the only ones in Britain to be found only on small offshore islands, and so may be exhibiting density compensation effects. With them excluded, the slope of the abundance–range size relation for mammals is not significantly different to that for birds. However, the elevation of the relation is higher for mammals than for birds, indicating that mammals are approximately 30 times more abundant than birds of equivalent geographic range size. An earlier study of these assemblages showed that, for a given body mass, bats had abundances more similar to birds than to non–volant mammals, suggesting that the difference in abundance between mammals and birds might be due to constraints of flight. Our analyses show that the abundance–range size relation for bats is not different for that from other mammals, and that the anomalously low abundance of bats for their body mass may result because they have smaller than expected geographic extents for their size. Other reasons why birds and mammals might have different elevations for the relation between population size and geographic range size are discussed, together with possible reasons for why the slopes of these relations might be similar.

Population abundance and body size in animal assemblages

Studies of the relationship between body mass and population abundance for terrestrial and aquatic animal species based on pooling data from many taxa and assemblages suggest that abundance scales with mass to the —0.75 power. Because metabolic rate scales with mass as (plus) 0.75, this result has been taken as evidence that all species in assemblages use equal amounts of energy. The evidence for ‘energetic equivalence’ is, however, equivocal, because within many individual assemblages the scaling of abundance on mass differs significantly from —0.75. Here, we present a summary of patterns of size and abundance in a number of different terrestrial, freshwater and marine animal assemblages, with the aim of discovering whether there is any generality in size-abundance patterns within assemblages, and whether any generality might hold across terrestrial, freshwater and marine environments.

Phylogeny and relations among abundance, geographical range and body size of British breeding birds

Links between bird phylogeny and abundance, geographical range and body size relations were examined with use of a newly published data set on the numbers and distribution of British breeding birds. There was a negative correlation between abundance (and geographical range) and body size across species, but no significant correlations within non-passerine and passerine taxa considered separately. Abundance correlated positively with geographical range across species and within non-passerines and passerines. Three measures of phylogenetic relatedness of bird tribes were considered, termed ‘rootedness’, ‘date of origin’ and ‘radiation d ate’. The date at which a tribe originated (measured as rootedness or date of origin) had a consistent but weak influence on the form of the relation between abundance and body size. Phylogeny was not implicated in the relation between geographical range and body size. Phylogenetically isolated tribes were more likely to show a positive correlation between abundance and body size than more recently evolved tribes. Results are discussed in the context of previous studies of both regional and local bird assemblages and the hypotheses suggested to explain associations with phylogeny.

Relations between abundance, body size and species number in British birds and mammals

British birds and mammals are compared in terms of their frequency distributions of abundance and body mass and in respect of the relation between abundance and body mass. Body masses of non-flying mammals are greater than those of resident birds which are, in turn, heavier than migrants; bats are lightest. The frequency distribution of masses are close to log-Normal for each of these groups, though their variances and skews differ. Differences in mean abundances (which are log-Normally distributed) parallel those in body mass. In each group, abundance declines with body mass: the exponent of the relation is close to the value of —0.75 predicted by the ‘energetic equivalence’ rule though not significantly different from the value of — 1.0 predicted by the ‘biomass equivalence’ rule. At comparable masses, species of non-flying mammals are more abundant than resident birds, migrant birds and bats by approximately 45, 300 and 200 times, respectively. The similarity between birds and bats in this regard may be no more than coincidental but it may be related to ecological similarities related to flight. The metabolic rates of non-flying mammals may be generally lower than those of birds and bats but not sufficiently to account for their much greater abundances.