TY - JOUR
T1 - Mandible length ratios as a mechanism for co-occurrence
T2 - evidence from a world-wide comparison of tiger beetle assemblages (Cicindelidae)
AU - Pearson, David
AU - Juliano, S. A.
PY - 1991/1/1
Y1 - 1991/1/1
N2 - Many tiger beetle populations are limited by food, and prey size is directly related to mandible length (chord). To determine if world-wide patterns of non-random species co-occurrence exist, mandible length ratios were measured for co-occurring species in 32 assemblages of tiger beetle species in India, Indonesia, Kenya, Latin America, North America, and Papua New Guinea. These assemblages were categorized as occurring in five distinct habitat types: rain forest floor, open forest floor, sand, desert grassland and pond edge. Real species assemblages were statistically compared to each of 4 randomly generated assemblages (based on different assumptions concerning mandible sizes). Open forest and pond edge showed mandible size ratios significantly different from random; in both cases the real mandible size ratios tended to be small. In none of the habitats was there a significant trend toward large size ratios. There were significant differences in mean mandible ratios for the five habitats after species numbers were taken into account. -from Authors
AB - Many tiger beetle populations are limited by food, and prey size is directly related to mandible length (chord). To determine if world-wide patterns of non-random species co-occurrence exist, mandible length ratios were measured for co-occurring species in 32 assemblages of tiger beetle species in India, Indonesia, Kenya, Latin America, North America, and Papua New Guinea. These assemblages were categorized as occurring in five distinct habitat types: rain forest floor, open forest floor, sand, desert grassland and pond edge. Real species assemblages were statistically compared to each of 4 randomly generated assemblages (based on different assumptions concerning mandible sizes). Open forest and pond edge showed mandible size ratios significantly different from random; in both cases the real mandible size ratios tended to be small. In none of the habitats was there a significant trend toward large size ratios. There were significant differences in mean mandible ratios for the five habitats after species numbers were taken into account. -from Authors
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0026282388&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0026282388&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.2307/3545340
DO - 10.2307/3545340
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:0026282388
SN - 0030-1299
VL - 61
SP - 223
EP - 233
JO - Oikos
JF - Oikos
IS - 2
ER -