Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 191

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Indirect Interactions Between Prey: Apparent Competition, Predator Aggregation, and Habitat Segregation

Schmitt, Russell J.·1987·Ecology

Abstract

Field experiments were performed to explore the nature of indirect interactions between two groups of ecologically distinct prey that occur on subtidal rocky reefs at Santa Catalina Island, California. Mobile gastropods (Tegula aureotincta, Tegula eiseni, and Astraea undosa) and sessile bivalves (mostly Chama arcana) share a common set of invertebrate predators (lobster Panulirus interrupts, cephalopod Octopus bimaculatus, and whelk Kelletia kelletii). The gastropods, which are secondarily preferred prey, principally occur on cobble reefs and less commonly on high—relief boulder reefs. Sessile bivalves and other species of favored prey are common on high—relief reefs and are rare or absent in cobble areas. The density of each predator species is greatest in high—relief areas containing abundant favored prey. Addition of bivalves to replicate cobble plots resulted in marked increases in predator density, relative to controls, because predators aggregated to areas containing favored prey. Greater densities of predators in the presence of experimentally added bivalves resulted in greater mortality and lower population densities of gastropods relative to controls. Conversely, mortality of Chama was higher where gastropods were common compared with cobble areas containing fewer gastropods. This occurred because the density of predators within a cobble reef, although low overall, was positively correlated with density of gastropods. Thus each group of prey was negatively affected by the presence of the other because each alternative prey increased the local density of predators. Such a doubly negative indirect interaction between prey, mediated by a shared predator, is known as a pparent competition; this is the first experimental demonstration of its existence. Because gastropods and bivalves are superior at withstanding predation in different habitats, shared predation and apparent competition may be sufficient mechanisms to maintain the pattern of habitat segregation displayed by these prey groups.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/1939880

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 191

Metadata

Authors
Schmitt, R. J.
Venue
Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1987-12
Volume
68
Issue
6
Pages
1887-1897
ISSN
  • 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-9170
OpenAlex
W1987759914
Cited by
191
References
1
FWCI
3.10
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: Indirect Interactions Between Prey: Apparent Competition, Predator Aggregation, and Habitat Segregation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1939880
The paper
Schmitt, R. J. (1987). Indirect Interactions Between Prey: Apparent Competition, Predator Aggregation, and Habitat Segregation. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.2307/1939880

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.