DOCSLIB.ORG

The Compression Hypothesis and Temporal Resource Partitioning (Feeding Strategies/Competition/Ecological Niche) THOMAS W

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Compression Hypothesis and Temporal Resource Partitioning (Feeding Strategies/Competition/Ecological Niche) THOMAS W Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA Vol. 71, No. 10, pp. 4169-4172, October 1974 The Compression Hypothesis and Temporal Resource Partitioning (feeding strategies/competition/ecological niche) THOMAS W. SCHOENER Biological Laboratories, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138 Communicated by Edward 0. Wilson, June 13, 1974 ABSTRACT Contingency models of feeding compare Optimal diet the energy per unit time gained from utilizing a resource unit of a particular kind (food types, habitat patches, Existing models of optimal diet relate selectivity to food abun- time periods) against that energy/time expected if the unit is skipped. Optimally, an' animal should reject the dance in two fundamentally different ways. Firstly, the opti- particular unit if and only if the former energy/time is less mal diet can be governed by contingency feeding,-in which the than the latter. Consequently, food or habitat types animal weighs the per-unit-time energy gain from an item of should be excluded if the prospect of finding and con- food if caught and eaten against the expected gain if that item suming better types is sufficiently high. In contrast', is skipped and only better items are searched for and con- feeding periods should be skipped only if it is less costly to wait than to feed. sumed. Secondly, the optimal diet can be governed by re- In situations of high food abundance, contingency stricted feeding, in which extent of an animal's fixed require- models imply that animals should bemaximally specialized ments or fixed opportunity to feed determines how selective it with respect to food or habitat type, but maximally should be. generalized with respect to time period. As food decreases at- in abundance, food and habitat types should be added to Models of contingency feeding have received the most the diet or itinerary, but time periods should be omitted tention in the literature so far (1, 4-6, *). They maximize the from feeding activity. In contrast, animals with fixed ratio of the expected net energy gained per item of available caloric intake should broaden diet, habitat, and feeding (= encountered) food to the expected time to find, catch and times as abundance decreases. eat an item of available food. This ratio is According to contingency models, competitors cannot cause item kinds to be dropped from the diet, but because they" can affect the values of patches once found, can E pie - CT cause habitat kinds to be dropped from the itinerary. YT= diet [1] Competitors also reduce the'value of feeding during'par- E pits + T77 ticular time periods, but ordinarily fairly severe depletion diet must occur before it is optimal'to feed no longer in -a period frequented by competitors. These arguments imply that temporal resource par- where e1 is the net energy (potential minus pursuit and han- titioning on a diel basis should be relatively rare. In fact, dling-swallowing costs) for a single item of Type i; t, is the specialization according to feeding period should differen- time to pursue, handle, and swallow a single item of Type tially occur in animals of limited abilities to use or process available food,- whereas that need not be the case for food- i; pi is the frequency of Type i in the environment (availabil- type or habitat specialization. It should also occur in ity), T. is the mean search time per item of available (en- animals sensitive to and found in variable climates. countered) food, and C. is the cost per unit search time. T, = K/D, where 1/AK is a rate of search and D is food density MacArthur and Pianka's (1) model of optimal feeding hy- (4, 5). Notice that summations are over only those item kinds pothesizes that a decrease in food abundance, as might be actually eaten. Models very similar in structure and basic caused by the invasion of a competitor, should decrease the concept to Eq. 1 have been derived by Charnov* and Pul- range of habitat patch types an animal utilizes but should liam (6). not affect the range of item kinds in its diet. This proposition YT ia Eq. 1 is written as a ratio of expectations that are was later labeled the "compression hypothesis" by Mac- taken per item of available food; exactly the same expression Arthur and Wilson (2) and related to the first stages of re- results- if expectations are per item eaten. To see this, let source partitioning. However, Pianka (3) has pointed out pi' be the abundance of Item Kind i in the diet and T/' be the that dimensions along which species divide resources can be time between items of food actually consumed. Then sub- three classified under general headings: food type, habitat, stitute pi. = p/(p)i for Pt and T7,,' = K/D( pi) for T, and time. MacArthur and Pianka's treatment deals with diet diet selectivity of resources arranged along the first two types of into Eq. 1. The numerator and denominator are now differ- dimensions but does not consider time. This note (1) rederives ent, but the 1/Z p, cancel to give the same ratio as before. the yet still diet compression hypothesis from a more general, x should be we very simple, model of optimal foraging; (2) asks how reduction To determine whether Item Type eaten, whether with x is than without in food abundance, as might be caused by competitors, affects need to know YT greater YT the range of diel feeding activity times; and (3) discusses the implications of these models for the theory of resource par- titioning. * E. L. Charnov, unpublished manuscript. 4169 Downloaded by guest on September 26, 2021 4170 Zoology: Schoener Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 71 (1974) it. In symbols, x should be eaten if and only if maximizes YT, subject to the constraint that the total feeding p ei + -CT8ET - time equals some fixed period. This animal, which maximizes pxez pie, C8T8 the energy gained during a fixed amount of feeding time, is an diet >diet ~~~~~~~[2] a, Pits + pxtx + T8 E-pti + T8 "energy maximizer" (8). In both these kinds of restricted feed- diet diet ing, what determines selectivity is the extent of the fixed caloric requirement or fixedd opportunity to feed. where the summations are taken over all items eaten except Onlv very simple models of restricted feeding exist so those x. fart. items of Type Inequality 2 reduces to They apply to sit-and-wait feeders or passive searchers, who pie, - C8T8 Z Nje1 -CUKA because they perform many activities simultaneously with e> diet diet food search and search inexpensively, are not charged for tz E piti + T8 Z Nft, + KA search time and energy. Selectivity in these models can diet diet clearly be seen to be related to fixed requirements or op- Notice that the expression right of the inequality sign is portunity, as follows. Fix the total number of food items an written two ways, one involving relative abundance (the animal would encounter during a feeding period. Then the pi), the other absolute abundances (the N1). The rightmost greater the requirements during that period, the more kind expression is obtained from Eq. 1 by substituting E N/A for of food must be taken, or the greater the time to feed, the more kinds can be taken. In these simple models, no account is D and Ni/E Ni for Pi, where N is the absolute abundance of taken of the possibility that while feeding on a particular item Item Type i in area A and the summations are taken over all another item might be missed; rather, they assume that feed- item kinds, whether in the diet or not. ing time is small relative to exposure time. Verbally, Inequality 3 says that Type x should be included if and only if the energy gained per unit time while catching Optimal habitats and the compression hypothesis and consuming it (ex/tx) exceeds the average energy per unit Since MacArthur and Piank4 model habitat selection as con- time gained by skipping the item and looking for and con- tigency feeding, we limit the following discussion to that kind suming better items. MacArthur (7) has given a simpler and of model. The general equation (Eq. 1) for contingency feeding more specific version of this statement. The effect of a lowering can'be used to model optimal utilization of randomly en- of food abundance (D) is to increase T8 and thereby lower YT. countered patch types simply by redefining the symbols: This in turn makes it more likely that previously rejected item es is now the energy gain from feeding in Patch Type i, ti is the kinds (such as Type x) will now be included in the diet. Here, time spent feeding in one such patch and T8 is the travelling selectivity decreases as the chance of finding something better time between two available 'patches. Just as for items, an after skipping an item decreases. Charnov* has elegantly animal can be thought of as accepting or rejecting patches employed derivatives to show that with decreasing abun- depending on their ei/t1. dance item kinds are added to the diet in decreasing order of MacArthur and Pianka's graphical arguments can easily be ei/ti. adapted to our algebra. An overall decrease in food abundance Contingency models are not as general as they might look, can lower e/t for patch kinds. If this can be represented in however, because they make the strong assumption that D Inequality 3 by a proportional reduction in each e, then this (food density) is constant during the time the animal is trying decrease cannot cause a patch type formerly included in the to maximize YT.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • MS-LS2-1 Ecosystems: Interactions, Energy, and Dynamics
    MS-LS2-1 Ecosystems: Interactions, Energy, and Dynamics Students who demonstrate understanding can: MS-LS2-1. Analyze and interpret data to provide evidence for the effects of resource availability on organisms and populations of organisms in an ecosystem. [Clarification Statement: Emphasis is on cause and effect relationships between resources and growth of individual organisms and the numbers of organisms in ecosystems during periods of abundant and scarce resources.] The performance expectation above was developed using the following elements from the NRC document A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Science and Engineering Disciplinary Core Ideas Crosscutting Concepts Practices LS2.A: Interdependent Relationships Cause and Effect in Ecosystems Analyzing and Interpreting Data Cause and effect relationships Analyzing data in 6–8 builds on K–5 Organisms, and populations of may be used to predict experiences and progresses to organisms, are dependent on their phenomena in natural or designed extending quantitative analysis to environmental interactions both with systems. other living things and with nonliving investigations, distinguishing between correlation and causation, and basic factors. statistical techniques of data and error In any ecosystem, organisms and analysis. populations with similar requirements Analyze and interpret data to for food, water, oxygen, or other provide evidence for phenomena. resources may compete with each other for limited resources, access to which consequently constrains their growth and reproduction. Growth of organisms and population increases are limited by access to resources. Observable features of the student performance by the end of the course: 1 Organizing data a Students organize the given data (e.g., using tables, graphs, and charts) to allow for analysis and interpretation of relationships between resource availability and organisms in an ecosystem, including: i.
    [Show full text]
  • Improving Habitat and Connectivity Model Predictions with Multi-Scale Resource Selection Functions from Two Geographic Areas
    Landscape Ecol (2019) 34:503–519 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-019-00788-w (0123456789().,-volV)(0123456789().,-volV) RESEARCH ARTICLE Improving habitat and connectivity model predictions with multi-scale resource selection functions from two geographic areas Ho Yi Wan . Samuel A. Cushman . Joseph L. Ganey Received: 22 May 2018 / Accepted: 18 February 2019 / Published online: 4 March 2019 Ó This is a U.S. government work and its text is not subject to copyright protection in the United States; however, its text may be subject to foreign copyright protection 2019 Abstract converted the models into landscape resistance sur- Context Habitat loss and fragmentation are the most faces and used simulations to model connectivity pressing threats to biodiversity, yet assessing their corridors for the species, and created composite impacts across broad landscapes is challenging. habitat and connectivity models by averaging the Information on habitat suitability is sometimes avail- local and non-local models. able in the form of a resource selection function model Results While the local and the non-local models developed from a different geographical area, but its both performed well, the local model performed best applicability is unknown until tested. in the part of the study area where it was built, but Objectives We used the Mexican spotted owl as a performed worse in areas that are beyond the extent of case study to demonstrate how models developed from the data used to train it. The composite habitat model different geographic areas affect our predictions for improved performances over both models in most habitat suitability, landscape resistance, and connec- cases.
    [Show full text]
  • For-75: an Ecosystem Approach to Natural Resources Management
    FOR-75 An Ecosystems Approach to Natural Resources Management Thomas G. Barnes, Extension Wildlife Specialist ur nation—and especially Kentucky—has an The glade cress Oabundance of renewable natural resources, including timber, wildlife, and water. These re- sources have allowed us to build a strong nation and economy, creating one of the highest stan- dards of living in the world. As our nation grew and prospered during the past 200 years, we ex- tracted those natural resources through agricul- ture, forestry, mining, urban or industrial expansion, and other developments. Ultimately, we affected the amount of wild lands that native plants and animals need for survival. In the past, natural resources agencies have ral- The glade cress grows in Jefferson and Bullitt counties lied public support for declining wildlife popula- and nowhere else in the world. tions. In the 1930s, Congress passed the Federal Aid to Wildlife Resto- Table 1. Selected Ecosystem Declines in the ration Act, also called including the bald eagle, brown pelican, peregrine United States the Pittman-Robertson falcon, and American alligator, have recovered % Decline (loss) or Act, and state wildlife from the brink of extinction. However, numerous Ecosystem or Community Degradation agencies received fund- other species and unique habitats are declining, Pacific Northwest Old Growth Forest 90 ing to restore numerous and the list of endangered and threatened organ- Northeastern Pine Barrens 48 wildlife species that isms continues to grow every year. Why are these Tall Grass Prairie 961 were in trouble, includ- additional species in trouble, while other species Palouse Prairie 98 ing white-tailed deer, are increasing their populations and ranges? Where did we go wrong? Why, almost immedi- Blackbelt Prairies 98 wild turkeys, wood ducks, elk, and prong- ately after passage of the Endangered Species Act, Midwestern Oak Savanna 981 horn antelope.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Principles for Resource Planners
    United States Department of National Biology Handbook Agriculture Subpart B—Conservation Planning Natural Resources Conservation Service Part 610 Ecological Principles for Resource Planners (190-VI-NBH, November 2004) Part 610 Ecological Principles for Resource Planners Contents: 610.00 Ecosystems and landscapes 610–1 610.01 Ecosystem processes 610–2 (a) Energy flow ............................................................................................... 610–2 (b) Water and nutrient cycles ........................................................................ 610–3 610.02 Ecosystem structure and its relation to ecosystem function 610–6 610.03 Ecosystem changes and disturbance 610–7 (a) Stability in ecosystems ............................................................................. 610–7 610.04 Biological diversity 610–8 (a) Hierarchy of diversity ............................................................................... 610–8 (b) Species interactions ............................................................................... 610–10 610.05 Applying ecological principles to habitat conservation, 610–11 restoration, and management (a) Area of management actions ................................................................. 610–11 (b) Edge effects ............................................................................................. 610–11 (c) Disturbance effects................................................................................. 610–11 (d) Isolation and distance effects ...............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity Glossary
    BIODIVERSITY GLOSSARY Biodiversity Glossary1 Access and benefit-sharing One of the three objectives of the Convention on Biological Diversity, as set out in its Article 1, is the “fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources, including by appro- priate access to genetic resources and by appropriate transfer of relevant technologies, taking into account all rights over those resources and to technologies, and by appropriate funding”. The CBD also has several articles (especially Article 15) regarding international aspects of access to genetic resources. Alien species A species occurring in an area outside of its historically known natural range as a result of intentional or accidental dispersal by human activities (also known as an exotic or introduced species). Biodiversity Biodiversity—short for biological diversity—means the diversity of life in all its forms—the diversity of species, of genetic variations within one species, and of ecosystems. The importance of biological diversity to human society is hard to overstate. An estimated 40 per cent of the global economy is based on biologi- cal products and processes. Poor people, especially those living in areas of low agricultural productivity, depend especially heavily on the genetic diversity of the environment. Biodiversity loss From the time when humans first occupied Earth and began to hunt animals, gather food and chop wood, they have had an impact on biodiversity. Over the last two centuries, human population growth, overex- ploitation of natural resources and environmental degradation have resulted in an ever accelerating decline in global biodiversity. Species are diminishing in numbers and becoming extinct, and ecosystems are suf- fering damage and disappearing.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological-Physical Interactions in The
    Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION—BIOLOGICAL–PHYSICAL INTERACTIONS IN THE SEA: EMERGENT FINDINGS AND NEW DIRECTIONS JAMES J. MCCARTHY AND ALLAN R. ROBINSON Harvard University BRIAN J. ROTHSCHILD University of Massachusetts Dartmouth Contents 1. Status and Progress in the Study of Interactive Dynamics 2. Overview of the Book 3. Concluding Remarks References 1. Status and Progress in the Study of Interactive Dynamics The stage is now set for dramatic progress toward a more complete understand- ing of the interactive dynamics among the physical processes that influence biogeo- chemical cycles and population dynamics and the attendant feedbacks in these sys- tems. The 1990s were a period of significant progress toward these goals. Substantial research accomplishments helped to reveal causes of variabilities in the abundances of organisms and their rates of production. Questions rooted primarily in the bio- logical and physical aspects of these interactions were refined, and new observing capabilities employing instrumentation, moorings, and satellite sensing systems were implemented. In the context of climate and global change, some research foci of the past decade were designed to better quantify baseline conditions, as in the case of the carbon cycle. Some intensive field campaigns were sited in regions for which time scales of biological processes from seasonal to multiannual are clearly influenced by physical processes. Some of these campaigns were directed toward regions of the ocean where neither light nor major nutrients seem to limit production, such as the equatorial The Sea, Volume 12, edited by Allan R. Robinson, James J. McCarthy, and Brian J. Rothschild ISBN 0-471-18901-4 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York 1 2 JAMES J.
    [Show full text]
  • Nutrition Resource Guide Fr
    Early Childhood Nutrition Resource Guide June 1998 National Center for Education in Maternal and Child Health EARLY CHILDHOOD NUTRITION RESOURCE GUIDE JUNE 1998 NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION IN MATERNAL AND CHILD HEALTH ARLINGTON,VA Cite as Clark M, Holt K, Sofka D, eds. 1998. Early Childhood Nutrition Resource Guide. Arlington, VA: National Center for Education in Maternal and Child Health. Early Childhood Nutrition Resource Guide is not copyrighted. Readers are free to duplicate and use all or part of the information contained in this publication. In accordance with accepted publishing standards, the National Center for Education in Maternal and Child Health (NCEMCH) requests acknowledgment, in print, of any information reproduced in another publication. The mission of the National Center for Education in Maternal and Child Health is to provide national lead- ership to the maternal and child health community in three key areas—program development, policy analysis and education, and state-of-the-art knowledge—to improve the health and well-being of the nation’s children and families. The Center’s multidisciplinary staff work with a broad range of public and private agencies and organizations to develop and improve programs in response to current needs in maternal and child health, address critical and emergent public policy issues in maternal and child health, and produce and provide access to a rich variety of policy and programmatic information. Established in 1982 at Georgetown University, NCEMCH is part of the Georgetown Public Policy Institute. NCEMCH is funded primarily by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services through the Health Resources and Services Administration’s Maternal and Child Health Bureau.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Resource Ecology and Management 1
    Natural Resource Ecology and Management 1 NATURAL RESOURCE Undergraduate Study The Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management offers ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT work for the Bachelor of Science degree with majors in animal ecology (http://catalog.iastate.edu/collegeofagricultureandlifesciences/ The department addresses a broad spectrum of natural resource and animal_ecology/) or forestry (http://catalog.iastate.edu/ environmental issues in a holistic approach to learning, discovery collegeofagricultureandlifesciences/forestry/). The department and engagement. Our vision of natural resources is that informed participates in interdisciplinary programs in biology, environmental protection and management of natural resources involves an integration studies, international studies, and pest management. By proper selection of biological, economic, and social considerations. Such an integrated of free and restricted elective courses, students can obtain a minor or a and comprehensive approach to the education of future generations of second major in these programs or other disciplines. natural resource managers and scientists is needed in order to sustain viable landscapes, facilitate strong communities, and produce desired Contact the department for information about minors from the goods, services, and functions from our natural resources. Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management. Our educational mission for the undergraduate and graduate programs is The Department provides numerous scholarships; application to provide those
    [Show full text]
  • BIOS 3010: Ecology Lecture 2: Habitat: Resources • Lecture Summary: – Resources: • Definition • Abiotic • Biotic • Space • Classification – the Niche
    BIOS 3010: Ecology Lecture 2: Habitat: Resources • Lecture summary: – Resources: • Definition • Abiotic • Biotic • Space • Classification – The niche Albrecht Dürer: A Young Hare 1502, The Large Turf 1503 (GSA, Vienna) Dr. S. Malcolm BIOS 3010: Ecology Lecture 2: slide 1 2. Resources and global security: • “The UN predicts that by 2025, two-thirds of us will experience water shortages, with severe lack of water blighting the lives and livelihoods of 1.8 billion. According to the UN World Water Assessment Programme, by 2050, 7 billion people in 60 countries may have to cope with water scarcity.” – Chenoweth, J. 2008. Water, water everywhere. New Scientist 23 August 2008: 28-32. Dr. S. Malcolm BIOS 3010: Ecology Lecture 2: slide 2 3. What is a resource?: • All things consumed by an organism (Tilman, 1982) – But, space is also a resource - therefore: • Resources are quantities that can be reduced by the activity of an organism – Or, in the glossary to Begon et al. (1996) a resource is defined as: • “that which may be consumed by an organism and, as a result, becomes unavailable to another” – e.g. food, water, nesting sites, etc. – Thus CO2, O2, and light can be either resources or conditions - and are more likely to be resources at high population densities and small scales. – Note: like conditions, resources can also act as constraints and cues. Dr. S. Malcolm BIOS 3010: Ecology Lecture 2: slide 3 1 4. Contrast with conditions: • “A condition is an abiotic environmental factor which varies in space and time. Conditions are not consumed or used up by organisms or made less available to others.” – e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Resource Selection Function Analyses: Assessing Habitat Use Relative To
    Resource Selection Function Analyses: Assessing habitat use relative to behavior and resource characteristics/availability for five common marine mammal species in the Southern California Bight Trent McDonald1, Mari A. Smultea2,3, Shay Howlin1, and Cathy Bacon2,4 1Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc., Laramie, WY; 2Marine Biology Department, Marine Mammal Behavioral Ecology Group, Texas A&M University at Galveston, Pelican Island, Galveston, TX 77553 3Smultea Environmental Sciences (SES), P.O Box 256, Preston, WA 98050; 4Marine Science Department, Texas A&M University at Galveston, Pelican Island, Galveston, TX 77553 What is an RSF (Resource Selection Function)? Manly et al. 1993, 2002 1. Animals make choices re: resources 2. Resources used disproportionately to availability Models choice using quantifiable habitat characteristics Habitat use & impacts fish, birds, mammals, polar bears • oil / gas exploration • global warming How apply RSF? 1. Randomly select “available” locations & attributes 2. Compare to sighting locations Co-variate (e.g., food abundance) =,xx = How do RSFs differ from density mapping? Density mapping estimates the used distribution only - - Not what’s available. Ignoring availability can bias estimates of preference -- - especially rare habitats Questions & Goals Do marine mammals in U.S. Navy SOCAL Range Complex prefer certain habitat? behave differently in different habitats? GOAL: 1. Establish “baseline” future changes? anthropogenic activities? Approach 15 aerial surveys 2008-2012 Systematic line-transect “First-observed” behavior state Slow = rest, mill, slow travel Travel San Diego U.S. Navy SOCAL Range Training Complex Statistics Standard logistic regression AIC ranking – 127 models Randomly Selected 35,167 points 7 habitat variables 1. Depth 2. Distance to shore 3. Slope 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Community Ecology Review
    But populations and species do not exist in a vacuum… Species interact… Community Ecology A) Five fundamental types of species interactions: Effect on species A B Competition A B Predation A B Mutualism A B Commensalism A B Amensalism A B B) Concept of the Niche 1) Best known definition of niche is Hutchinson (e.g., 1957) a) role organism plays in environment b) role can be determined by measuring all of an organism’s activities and requirements 2) Examples 2-factors 3-factors high Substratum friability low low high Wave exposure 3) By extension… niche defined as an N-dimensional hyperspace (encompasses all effects and requirements of a species) B) Concept of the Niche 3) Two types of niche a) fundamental: niche space determined by environmental factors and resource requirements. Manifest in the absence of other organisms. b) realized: niche space determined by combined abiotic and biotic factors. Realized in presence of other organisms fundamental realized fundamental niche always bigger (or at least as large) - biological interactions can (usually do) limit realized niche C) Competition Defined: The common use of a resource that is in limited supply. 1) Within and between species a) Intraspecific - among individuals of the same species source of density dependence discussed previously b) Interspecific - among individuals of two or more species 2) Two types of competition a) Interference b) Exploitative C) Competition 2) Two types of competition a) Interference - direct competition A B i) e.g., aggression ii) e.g., territoriality (fishes, birds, limpets) b) Exploitation - indirect competition i) Compete through a resource (R) ii) e.g., sessile spp.
    [Show full text]
  • Cuyamaca College Course Outline of Record Biology
    Curriculum Committee Approval: 05/07/19 Lecture Contact Hours: 48-54; Homework Hours: 96-108; Total Student Learning Hours: 144-162 CUYAMACA COLLEGE COURSE OUTLINE OF RECORD BIOLOGY 112 – CONTEMPORARY ISSUES IN ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES 3 hours lecture, 3 units Catalog Description Through the scientific study of basic concepts in ecology, students apply their knowledge and scientific reasoning to the study of contemporary problems dealing with renewable and nonrenewable resources. Environmental resource problems involving air, water, energy, human population growth, and plant and animal diversity are examined in context of their scientific, political, economic and social implications. Alternatives for resolving existing problems and preventing future ones will be explored. Prerequisite None Course Content 1) Introduction a. Classification of natural resources b. Sustainability c. Environmental history d. Introduction to the scientific method and its applications in ecology and environmental science e. Risk analysis 2) Basic Principles of Ecology a. What is ecology? What is environmental science? b. Ecological levels of organization of matter in nature c. The Ecosystem: definition, what makes it work? 1. Components of ecosystems 2. Abiotic and biotic components of ecosystems 3. Energy flow in the ecosystem: food chains, food pyramids, food webs 4. Biodiversity and stability of the ecosystem 5. Succession in ecosystems d. Biogeochemical cycles: 1. Carbon, nitrogen, phosphorous and hydrologic cycles 2. Impact of man on these cycles e. Biogeography 1. Terrestrial 2. Aquatic f. Evolution and biodiversity 1. Natural selection 2. Ecological niches 3. Speciation 4. Extinction g. Sustaining wild species 3) Community Ecology a. Community structure 1. Stratification 2. Species diversity b. Roles of species (indicator, native, non-native) c.
    [Show full text]