The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Spatial Heterogeneity, Indirect Interactions, and the Coexistence of Prey Species
Abstract
Predation may generate patterns in the structure of communities similar to those produced by competition. The potential role of spatial heterogeneity in promoting the coexistence of prey species is explored with both analytical and graphical models. In these models, prey interact indirectly through their effect on predator numbers: an interaction that leads to "apparent competition" and a problem in species coexistence. A model of prey coexistence in a homogeneous habitat is explored. If prey grow logistically, prey abundance is measured by the effect prey have on predator growth, and the predator consumes prey in a finegrained manner, the criterion for species k to remain in the community takes a simple form: its sensitivity to predation (ak/rk) cannot exceed the average sensitivity to predation of the entire community, ($$\overline {a/r}$$), divided by a measure of the intensity of predation on the community (Δ). At high Δ, species must have very similar values for ai/ri to coexist. This suggests that in spatially homogeneous environments, prey coexistence is difficult to achieve at high intensities of predation. There are two distinct ways in which spatial segregation may promote prey coexistence. First, habitat selection by the predator may provide each prey with an implicit refuge in the presence of the alternative prey, because predators will tend to leave a habitat in which their foraging yields are relatively low. If predators can select their habitats optimally without cost, and without interference from other predators, it is shown that at equilibrium no prey suffers a reduction in density because other prey are present in the diet. Nonoptimal habitat selection or interference between predators makes prey that have either low intrinsic growth rates (ri) or high rates of predator attack (ai) vulnerable to density reductions or extinction, as a result of predator "spillover" between patches. Second, if prey are spatially segregated, the predator population may be broken into two, partially independent subpopulations coupled by random predator movement. If each prey grows exponentially in the absence of predation, the permissible difference in their sensitivities to predation (ai/ri) is bounded by a measure of spatial coupling; the more tightly the two patches are linked by predator movement, the more similar the values for ai/ri must be if the prey are to continue to coexist. This model also provides a simple illustration of how spatial heterogeneity may stabilize an otherwise unstable predator-prey system. The evolutionary stability of segregation between prey is briefly discussed. Even if habitat partitioning relaxes apparent competition between prey occupying separate patches, the segregational pattern itself may persist because of apparent competition within each patch. Several examples from field studies suggest that habitat partitioning and the movement behavior of both predators and prey are important factors affecting coexistence in prey communities.
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
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
The Geometry of Biological Time
Winfree, A. T. (1980) · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-22492-2 · Cited by 3,613
Brooks, J. L., & Dodson, S. I. (1965) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.150.3692.28 · Cited by 3,280
Cited by
Mechanisms of Maintenance of Species Diversity
Chesson, P. (2000) · Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.31.1.343 · Cited by 6,645
Food Web Complexity and Community Dynamics
Polis, G. A., & Strong, D. R. (1996) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/285880 · Cited by 2,109
FOOD AVAILABILITY AND TIGER SHARK PREDATION RISK INFLUENCE BOTTLENOSE DOLPHIN HABITAT USE
Heithaus, M. R., & Dill, L. M. (2002) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[0480:faatsp]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 544
Spatial Ecology of Bacteria at the Microscale in Soil
Raynaud, X., & Nunan, N. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0087217 · Cited by 401
Determination of Species Composition in the Enallagma Damselfly Assemblages of Permanent Lakes
McPeek, M. A. (1990) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1940249 · Cited by 295
Metadata
- Authors
- Holt, R. D.
- Venue
- The American Naturalist
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 1984-09
- Volume
- 124
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 377-406
- ISSN
- 0003-0147 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5323
- OpenAlex
- W2034207977
- Cited by
- 769
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 16.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Spatial Heterogeneity, Indirect Interactions, and the Coexistence of Prey Species. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/284280
- The paper
- Holt, R. D. (1984). Spatial Heterogeneity, Indirect Interactions, and the Coexistence of Prey Species. The American Naturalist. https://doi.org/10.1086/284280
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.