A Comparison of Plants and Animals in Their Responses to Risk of Consumption

Both plants and animals reduce their risk of being eaten by detecting and responding to herbivore and predator cues. Plants tend to be less mobile and rely on more local information perceived with widely dispersed and redundant tissues. As such, plants can more easily multi-task. Plants are more tolerant of damage and use damage to their own tissues as reliable cues of risk; plants have a higher threshold before responding to the threat of herbivory. Plants also use diverse cues that include fragments of plant tissue and molecular patterns from herbivores, herbivore feeding, or microbial associates of herbivores. Instead of fleeing from attackers, plants reallocate valuable resources to organs at less risk. They minimize unnecessary defenses against unrealized risks and costs of failing to defend against actual risk. Plants can remember and learn, although these abilities are poorly understood

Error management theory and the adaptive significance of transgenerational maternal-stress effects on offspring phenotype

It is well established that circulating maternal stress hormones (glucocorticoids, GCs) can alter offspring phenotype. There is also a growing body of empirical work, within ecology and evolution, indicating that maternal GCs link the environment experienced by the mother during gestation with changes in offspring phenotype. These changes are considered to be adaptive if the maternal environment matches the offspring\u27s environment and maladaptive if it does not. While these ideas are conceptually sound, we lack a testable framework that can be used to investigate the fitness costs and benefits of altered offspring phenotypes across relevant future environments. We present error management theory as the foundation for a framework that can be used to assess the adaptive potential of maternal stress hormones on offspring phenotype across relevant postnatal scenarios. To encourage rigorous testing of our framework, we provide field-testable hypotheses regarding the potential adaptive role of maternal stress across a diverse array of taxa and life histories, as well as suggestions regarding how our framework might provide insight into past, present, and future research. This perspective provides an informed lens through which to design and interpret experiments on the effects of maternal stress, provides a framework for predicting and testing variation in maternal stress across and within taxa, and also highlights how rapid environmental change that induces maternal stress may lead to evolutionary traps

Error management theory and the adaptive significance of transgenerational maternal-stress effects on offspring phenotype

It is well established that circulating maternal stress hormones (glucocorticoids, GCs) can alter offspring phenotype. There is also a growing body of empirical work, within ecology and evolution, indicating that maternal GCs link the environment experienced by the mother during gestation with changes in offspring phenotype. These changes are considered to be adaptive if the maternal environment matches the offspring\u27s environment and maladaptive if it does not. While these ideas are conceptually sound, we lack a testable framework that can be used to investigate the fitness costs and benefits of altered offspring phenotypes across relevant future environments. We present error management theory as the foundation for a framework that can be used to assess the adaptive potential of maternal stress hormones on offspring phenotype across relevant postnatal scenarios. To encourage rigorous testing of our framework, we provide field-testable hypotheses regarding the potential adaptive role of maternal stress across a diverse array of taxa and life histories, as well as suggestions regarding how our framework might provide insight into past, present, and future research. This perspective provides an informed lens through which to design and interpret experiments on the effects of maternal stress, provides a framework for predicting and testing variation in maternal stress across and within taxa, and also highlights how rapid environmental change that induces maternal stress may lead to evolutionary traps

Error management theory and the adaptive significance of transgenerational maternal‐stress effects on offspring phenotype

It is well established that circulating maternal stress hormones (glucocorticoids, GCs) can alter offspring phenotype. There is also a growing body of empirical work, within ecology and evolution, indicating that maternal GCs link the environment experienced by the mother during gestation with changes in offspring phenotype. These changes are considered to be adaptive if the maternal environment matches the offspring’s environment and maladaptive if it does not. While these ideas are conceptually sound, we lack a testable framework that can be used to investigate the fitness costs and benefits of altered offspring phenotypes across relevant future environments. We present error management theory as the foundation for a framework that can be used to assess the adaptive potential of maternal stress hormones on offspring phenotype across relevant postnatal scenarios. To encourage rigorous testing of our framework, we provide field‐testable hypotheses regarding the potential adaptive role of maternal stress across a diverse array of taxa and life histories, as well as suggestions regarding how our framework might provide insight into past, present, and future research. This perspective provides an informed lens through which to design and interpret experiments on the effects of maternal stress, provides a framework for predicting and testing variation in maternal stress across and within taxa, and also highlights how rapid environmental change that induces maternal stress may lead to evolutionary traps.This article provides a quantitative framework as a means of generating field‐testable hypotheses regarding the adaptive potential of maternal stress under different scenario combinations. By providing a mechanistic basis for examining the adaptive potential of maternal stress effects, our overall aim is not only to provide a means for explaining patterns and testing new hypotheses, but to catalyze the study of maternal stress effects under this framework across a diversity of species, life histories, and environments.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/145404/1/ece34074_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/145404/2/ece34074.pd

Proportional fitness loss and the timing of defensive investment: a cohesive framework across animals and plants

The risk of consumption is a pervasive aspect of ecology and recent work has focused on synthesis of consumer–resource interactions (e.g., enemy–victim ecology). Despite this, theories pertaining to the timing and magnitude of defenses in animals and plants have largely developed independently. However, both animals and plants share the common dilemma of uncertainty of attack, can gather information from the environment to predict future attacks and alter their defensive investment accordingly. Here, we present a novel, unifying framework based on the way an organism’s ability to defend itself during an attack can shape their pre-attack investment in defense. This framework provides a useful perspective on the nature of information use and variation in defensive investment across the sequence of attack-related events, both within and among species. It predicts that organisms with greater proportional fitness loss if attacked will gather and respond to risk information earlier in the attack sequence, while those that have lower proportional fitness loss may wait until attack is underway. This framework offers a common platform to compare and discuss consumer effects and provides novel insights into the way risk information can propagate through populations, communities, and ecosystems

Predator Effects in Predator-Free Space: The Remote Effects of Predators on Prey

Predators can have remote effects on prey populations that are connected by migration (i.e. prey metapopulations) because predator-mediated changes in prey behavior and abundance effectively transmit the impact of predators into predator-free prey populations. Behavioral changes in prey that might give rise to remote effects are altered rates of migration or activity in the presence of predation risk (called non-consumptive effects, fear- or μ-driven effects, and risk effects). Changes in prey abundance that may result in remote effects arise from changes in prey density due to direct predation (i.e. consumptive effects, also called N-driven effects and predation effects). Remote effects provide a different perspective on both predator-prey interactions and spatial subsidies, illustrating how the interplay among space, time, behavior, and consumption generates emergent spatial dynamics in places where we might not expect them. We describe how strong remote effects of predators may essentially generate “remote control” over the dynamics of local populations, alter the persistence of metapopulations, shift the importance of particular paradigms of metacommunity structure, alter spatial subsidies, and affect evolutionary dynamics. We suggest how experiments might document remote effects and predict that remote effects will be an important component of prey dynamics under several common scenarios: when predators induce large changes in prey dispersal behavior, when predators dramatically reduce the number of prey available to disperse, when prey movement dynamics occur over greater distances or shorter timescales than predator movement, and when prey abundance is not already limited by competitors or conspecifics

REVISITING THE CLASSICS: CONSIDERING NONCONSUMPTIVE EFFECTS IN TEXTBOOK EXAMPLES OF PREDATOR–PREY INTERACTIONS

Predator effects on prey dynamics are conventionally studied by measuring changes in prey abundance attributed to consumption by predators. We revisit four classic examples of predator–prey systems often cited in textbooks and incorporate subsequent studies of nonconsumptive effects of predators (NCE), defined as changes in prey traits (e.g., behavior, growth, development) measured on an ecological time scale. Our review revealed that NCE were integral to explaining lynx–hare population dynamics in boreal forests, cascading effects of top predators in Wisconsin lakes, and cascading effects of killer whales and sea otters on kelp forests in nearshore marine habitats. The relative roles of consumption and NCE of wolves on moose and consequent indirect effects on plant communities of Isle Royale depended on climate oscillations. Nonconsumptive effects have not been explicitly tested to explain the link between planktonic alewives and the size structure of the zooplankton, nor have they been invoked to attribute keystone predator status in intertidal communities or elsewhere. We argue that both consumption and intimidation contribute to the total effects of keystone predators, and that characteristics of keystone consumers may differ from those of predators having predominantly NCE. Nonconsumptive effects are often considered as an afterthought to explain observations inconsistent with consumption‐based theory. Consequently, NCE with the same sign as consumptive effects may be overlooked, even though they can affect the magnitude, rate, or scale of a prey response to predation and can have important management or conservation implications. Nonconsumptive effects may underlie other classic paradigms in ecology, such as delayed density dependence and predator‐mediated prey coexistence. Revisiting classic studies enriches our understanding of predator–prey dynamics and provides compelling rationale for ramping up efforts to consider how NCE affect traditional predator–prey models based on consumption, and to compare the relative magnitude of consumptive and NCE of predators