Cited by 23Mathematical and Theoretical Epidemiology and Ecology ModelsEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies

Food web structure and the strength of transient indirect effects

Fox, Jeremy W., Olsen, Erik·2000·Oikos

Abstract

The relative importance of direct and indirect effects in ecological communities remains unresolved. Indirect effects may diminish as they propagate through highly reticulate food webs. We tested this hypothesis by assembling replicate food webs of different complexity in laboratory microcosms, and comparing the transmission of indirect effects through these webs. By providing the top predator ( Didinium ) with either one ( Paramecium ) or two ( Paramecium and Colpidium ) species of protists as prey, we created linear or reticulate food webs where we could examine the transient response of predators to an indirect effect. Addition of Chlamydomonas , a small alga consumed by Paramecium , but not by Colpidium , perturbed the system and generated an indirect effect on Didinium . We expected the proportional response of Didinium to Chlamydomonas addition would be smaller in the reticulate web containing alternative, unperturbed prey ( Colpidium ). We measured predator response as predator yield, the maximum number of predators produced prior to overexploitation of prey and subsequent predator decline. The ratio of yield in perturbed bottles to yield in unperturbed bottles measures the proportional response of Didinium to Chlamydomonas addition. We expected this ratio to be smaller with Colpidium present. Contrary to expectations, alternative prey enhanced rather than diminished predator response to the perturbation. This resulted from competition between the prey species, a facto…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1034/j.1600-0706.2000.900202.x

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Empirical studies of indirect effects have tended to focus on smaller or simplified systems, such as intertidal communities, experimental microcosms, or relatively reduced terrestrial food webs.

    “Empirical studies have tended to focus on smaller or simplified systems, such as intertidal communities (Menge 1995;Wootton 2002), experimental microcosms (Fox and Olsen 2000), or relatively reduced terrestrial food webs (Vial et al. 2011), where interactions can be more readily quantified.”

    From A Food Web Model of the Serengeti: Stability, Dynamics and Indirect Effects (2026) · cites this paper as Fox and Olsen 2000

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fox, J. W., & Olsen, E.
Affiliations
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
Venue
Oikos
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-08
Volume
90
Issue
2
Pages
219-226
ISSN
  • 0030-1299 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0706
OpenAlex
W2098183135
Cited by
23
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2
FWCI
1.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Oikos (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Mathematical and Theoretical Epidemiology and Ecology Models
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Animal Ecology and Behavior Studies
Keywords
indirect effects, food web structure, food web complexity, predator response, Paramecium, Chlamydomonas, alternative prey, prey competition, overexploitation, microcosm experiments

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review