THE COSTS OF AN INDUCIBLE DEFENSE IN ANURAN LARVAE

By J. Van Buskirk. 2000

226 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2ed12fccc3d5c7de42102f9db41347ca75011574

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

1. Josh R Auld
2. Rick A. Relyea
3. L. Rowe
4. R. Wilson
5. P. Kraft
6. Marc Mangel
7. Mccollum
8. J. E. Byers

In Global and Planetary Change

1. Josh R Auld
2. R. Damme
3. R. Wilson
4. P. Kraft
5. Marc Mangel
6. Mccollum
7. J. E. Byers
8. R. Altwegg

Citations in the corpus

• PREY STATE AND EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN AFFECT RELATIVE SIZE OF TRAIT- AND DENSITY-MEDIATED INDIRECT EFFECTS (2003, background): “However, in some circumstances with a different a model formulation, higher resource levels may cause an increase in risk taking by prey (Abrams 1991a, b, Van Buskirk 2000).”
• Functional mechanisms of an inducible defence in tadpoles: morphology and behaviour influence mortality risk from predation (2000, background): “A second line of evidence supporting the expectation that tail depth is positively related to swimming comes from selection studies, which ®nd that amphibian larvae with relatively deep tail ®ns are effective at escaping predators (Van Buskirk et al., 1997; Van Buskirk & Schmidt, 2000).”
• Predator‐specific changes in the morphology and swimming performance of larval Rana lessonae (2005, methodology): “We followed Van Buskirk & McCollum (2000) and defined ‘body size’ as the first component derived from a principal”
• Impact of non‐indigenous species on natives enhanced by anthropogenic alteration of selection regimes (2002, background): “For example, Van Buskirk (2000) , although he does not address non-indigenous species, evidences the loss in fitness due to development and maintenance of antipredator traits in anurans when they were experimentally exposed to, yet protected from predators.”
• PREDATOR-INDUCED LIFE-HISTORY PLASTICITY UNDER TIME CONSTRAINTS IN POOL FROGS (2002, background): “Thus, animals living under predation risk often grow and develop more slowly than those in predator-free environments (Fraser and Gilliam 1992, McPeek and Peckarsky 1998, Van Buskirk 2000).”
• PREDATOR- AND COMPETITOR-INDUCED PLASTICITY: HOW CHANGES IN FORAGING MORPHOLOGY AFFECT PHENOTYPIC TRADE-OFFS (2005, background): “…decade, researchers have discovered that predators can induce larval anurans (via chemical cues) to hide more, feed less, and develop relatively large tails and small bodies, and these responses allow tadpoles to avoid predators and escape predatory strikes (Van Buskirk 2000, Relyea 2001, 2003).”