Cargando…

Comparing two measures of phenological synchrony in a predator–prey interaction: Simpler works better

1. Global climate change has sparked a vast research effort into the demographic and evolutionary consequences of mismatches between consumer and resource phenology. Many studies have used the difference in peak dates to quantify phenological synchrony (match in dates, MD), but this approach has bee...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ramakers, Jip J. C., Gienapp, Phillip, Visser, Marcel E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7078916/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31691954
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.13143
_version_ 1783507718058803200
author Ramakers, Jip J. C.
Gienapp, Phillip
Visser, Marcel E.
author_facet Ramakers, Jip J. C.
Gienapp, Phillip
Visser, Marcel E.
author_sort Ramakers, Jip J. C.
collection PubMed
description 1. Global climate change has sparked a vast research effort into the demographic and evolutionary consequences of mismatches between consumer and resource phenology. Many studies have used the difference in peak dates to quantify phenological synchrony (match in dates, MD), but this approach has been suggested to be inconclusive, since it does not incorporate the temporal overlap between the phenological distributions (match in overlap, MO). 2. We used 24 years of detailed data on the phenology of a predator–prey system, the great tit (Parus major) and the main food for its nestlings, caterpillars, to estimate MD and MO at the population and brood levels. We compared the performance of both metrics on two key demographic parameters: offspring recruitment probability and selection on the timing of reproduction. 3. Although MD and MO correlated quadratically as expected, MD was a better predictor for both offspring recruitment and selection on timing than MO. We argue—and verify through simulations—that this is because quantifying MO has to be based on nontrivial, difficult‐to‐verify assumptions that likely render MO too inaccurate as a proxy for food availability in practice. 4. Our results have important implications for the allocation of research efforts in long‐term population studies in highly seasonal environments.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7078916
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70789162020-03-19 Comparing two measures of phenological synchrony in a predator–prey interaction: Simpler works better Ramakers, Jip J. C. Gienapp, Phillip Visser, Marcel E. J Anim Ecol Trophic Interactions 1. Global climate change has sparked a vast research effort into the demographic and evolutionary consequences of mismatches between consumer and resource phenology. Many studies have used the difference in peak dates to quantify phenological synchrony (match in dates, MD), but this approach has been suggested to be inconclusive, since it does not incorporate the temporal overlap between the phenological distributions (match in overlap, MO). 2. We used 24 years of detailed data on the phenology of a predator–prey system, the great tit (Parus major) and the main food for its nestlings, caterpillars, to estimate MD and MO at the population and brood levels. We compared the performance of both metrics on two key demographic parameters: offspring recruitment probability and selection on the timing of reproduction. 3. Although MD and MO correlated quadratically as expected, MD was a better predictor for both offspring recruitment and selection on timing than MO. We argue—and verify through simulations—that this is because quantifying MO has to be based on nontrivial, difficult‐to‐verify assumptions that likely render MO too inaccurate as a proxy for food availability in practice. 4. Our results have important implications for the allocation of research efforts in long‐term population studies in highly seasonal environments. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-12-17 2020-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7078916/ /pubmed/31691954 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.13143 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Journal of Animal Ecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Trophic Interactions
Ramakers, Jip J. C.
Gienapp, Phillip
Visser, Marcel E.
Comparing two measures of phenological synchrony in a predator–prey interaction: Simpler works better
title Comparing two measures of phenological synchrony in a predator–prey interaction: Simpler works better
title_full Comparing two measures of phenological synchrony in a predator–prey interaction: Simpler works better
title_fullStr Comparing two measures of phenological synchrony in a predator–prey interaction: Simpler works better
title_full_unstemmed Comparing two measures of phenological synchrony in a predator–prey interaction: Simpler works better
title_short Comparing two measures of phenological synchrony in a predator–prey interaction: Simpler works better
title_sort comparing two measures of phenological synchrony in a predator–prey interaction: simpler works better
topic Trophic Interactions
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7078916/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31691954
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.13143
work_keys_str_mv AT ramakersjipjc comparingtwomeasuresofphenologicalsynchronyinapredatorpreyinteractionsimplerworksbetter
AT gienappphillip comparingtwomeasuresofphenologicalsynchronyinapredatorpreyinteractionsimplerworksbetter
AT vissermarcele comparingtwomeasuresofphenologicalsynchronyinapredatorpreyinteractionsimplerworksbetter