The DOI matches its Crossref record; 140 of the 140 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Host–parasitoid population dynamics*
Open accessAbstract
This address deals with just one kind of natural enemy, insect parasitoids, and illustrates some ways in which our understanding of their dynamical interaction with hosts has advanced over the past 25 years or so. Parasitoids comprise some 10% or more of all metazoan species, and largely belong to two families, the Diptera (two-winged flies) and the Hymenoptera (sawflies, bees, wasps and ants). Excellent introductions to the biology of parasitoids can be found in Clausen (1940), Askew (1971) and Godfray (1994). Adult female parasitoids lay one or more of their eggs on, in or close to the body of their host, usually an immature stage of another insect, which is then consumed over a period of days or weeks by the feeding parasitoid larva or larvae. As in most true parasites, all the food necessary to complete development comes from a single host, but like true predators this almost always leads to the death of the host, albeit with a delay until the parasitoid larva is fully developed. Parasitoids have long been popular subjects for ecological study for several reasons. First, they are important for biological pest control and this has stimulated much empirical and theoretical work on the attributes that make parasitoids effective pest control agents. Secondly, parasitoids are ideal subjects for developing relatively simple population models. This is mainly because it is only the adult females that search for hosts, and because the act of finding a host is normally followed by oviposition. The success in finding and attacking hosts therefore closely defines parasitoid reproduction, which means that (i) host–parasitoid models can have a much simpler structure than corresponding predator–prey models in which all predator stages may attack prey with different effectiveness, and (ii) reproduction is less closely defined by prey consumption. Finally, many species of parasitoids and their hosts can readily be cultured in laboratory microcosms, and this has greatly increased the amount of empirical information on host–parasitoid interactions under controlled conditions. This experimental approach to population dynamics has rightly been extolled by Kareiva et al. (1989). Much of the work on the dynamics of host–parasitoid interactions has taken a mechanistic approach. Components of the interaction are investigated using simple experiments, and their dynamical effects examined in a step-wise way within population models. The overall objective is to have a detailed understanding of how the important processes operating in the host and parasitoid life cycles affect the dynamics of the populations. These components may be the fundamental demographic parameters, features of the life histories, effects of other interacting species or other features of the habitat such as patchiness of resources and variability of resource quality. In each case, empirical information is needed to describe the components and define their relationship with key variables such as population density. From this, a description is obtained of each component in an appropriate model framework. Finally, analysis of the parameterised model indicates the dynamical effects of that component. Such a mechanistic approach to population dynamics is demanding of data and requires a particularly close interaction between data and model development. This address illustrates how the dynamics of host–parasitoid interactions may be influenced by three major ecological processes: by spatial patchiness, by interactions with other species, and by metapopulation structure. A common underlying theme is that parasitism does not occur at random and that spatial and other processes lead to aggregated distributions of parasitism amongst the host population. The realisation of how important spatial processes are to population dynamics in general has led to a revolution in the subject (Wiens 1989), and as a result many of the earlier, simple host–parasitoid models are now viewed as rather special limiting cases. As is usually the case, developing the mathematical models has sometimes proved less of a challenge than designing and executing appropriate studies to collect the data. But it is encouraging that there are now several examples where empirical field studies and models have been drawn fairly close together (e.g. Hassell 1980; Jones et al. 1993; Reeve et al. 1994; Murdoch et al. 1996). But problems of spatial scale still pervade ecology (Levin 1992, 1994). The interactions discussed in this paper involve either a single host and parasitoid species interacting together or simple webs, and are discussed at two very different spatial scales. On the one hand, there are local populations characterised by more-or-less complete mixing of individuals at some point(s) during the generation period. On the other hand, there are metapopulations formed by collections of local populations linked by some degree of dispersal each generation between the individual local populations. Bu
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Problem of Pattern and Scale in Ecology: The Robert H. MacArthur Award Lecture
Levin, S. A. (1992) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1941447 · Cited by 6,792
Optimal foraging, the marginal value theorem
Charnov, E. L. (1976) · Theoretical Population Biology · doi:10.1016/0040-5809(76)90040-x · Cited by 5,374
Food Web Complexity and Species Diversity
Paine, R. T. (1966) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/282400 · Cited by 5,361
Evolution in Changing Environments: Some Theoretical Explorations. (MPB-2)
Levins, R. (1968) · Princeton University Press eBooks · doi:10.1515/9780691209418 · Cited by 5,302
Stability and Complexity in Model Ecosystems
May, R. M. (2001) · Princeton University Press eBooks · doi:10.1515/9780691206912 · Cited by 5,183
STABILITY AND COMPLEXITY IN MODEL ECOSYSTEMS
Schoener, T. W. (1974) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.1974.tb00784.x · Cited by 3,928
Behavioural Ecology: An Evolutionary Approach
Adams, J., Krebs, J. R., & Davies, N. B. (1992) · The Journal of Animal Ecology · doi:10.2307/5530 · Cited by 3,899
Wiens, J. A. (1989) · Functional Ecology · doi:10.2307/2389612 · Cited by 3,689
Hanski, L. (1999) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198540663.001.0001 · Cited by 3,535
Some Demographic and Genetic Consequences of Environmental Heterogeneity for Biological Control
Levins, R. (1969) · Bulletin of the Entomological Society of America · doi:10.1093/besa/15.3.237 · Cited by 3,474
Cited by
Can Generalist Predators be Effective Biocontrol Agents?
Symondson, W. O. C., Sunderland, K. D., & Greenstone, M. H. (2002) · Annual Review of Entomology · doi:10.1146/annurev.ento.47.091201.145240 · Cited by 1,535
SIMPLE CONNECTIVITY MEASURES IN SPATIAL ECOLOGY
Moilanen, A., & Nieminen, M. (2002) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[1131:scmise]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 709
Metadata
- Authors
- Hassell, M. P.
- Venue
- Journal of Animal Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2000-07
- Volume
- 69
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 543-566
- ISSN
- 0021-8790 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2656
- OpenAlex
- W2082296409
- Cited by
- 290
- References
- 140
- FWCI
- 6.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Host–parasitoid population dynamics*. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2656.2000.00445.x
- The paper
- Hassell, M. P. (2000). Host–parasitoid population dynamics*. Journal of Animal Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2656.2000.00445.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.