Paper detail

Estimating Interaction Strengths with Correlations in Annual Relative Weight: Interspecific Competition and Predation in Fishes, Pueblo Reservoir, Colorado

Quantifying interaction strength between species is of interest in food web studies for understanding population dynamics. Theory has run ahead of experiment in solving equations describing ecological systems (the Lotka-Volterra equations, for example). Modeling approaches depend upon quantitative knowledge of interaction strengths among species, yet there are few methods available for estimating strengths of interactions between species, especially in the field. Competition and predation in fishes is traditionally studied with a variety of methods, most requiring extensive sampling to determine stock densities or extensive stomach content or isotope analysis. Average relative weight of fish species in an ecosystem can usually be accurately determined with much smaller sample sizes than required for accurate determination of stock densities. Correlations of mean annual relative weights may be used to test hypotheses and establish interaction strengths regarding competition and predation among fishes. The trends are sufficiently suggestive to use a strong positive correlation as supporting evidence of competition and possibly indicative of the magnitude of competition if other evidence such as analysis of stomach contents is also present. Likewise, a strong negative correlation might be interpreted as relevant when forming a hypothesis of predation and as supporting evidence of the magnitude of predation if other evidence is also present. In systems where regular weight and length survey data are available, this method can suggest the likely strength of competitive and predatory relationships and may be more cost effective than stomach content or isotope analysis.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.