Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T02:50:10.600Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Microhabitat partitioning is driven by preferences, not competition, in two Costa Rican millipede species

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 September 2021

Shane M. Cooley  and
Ronald G. Oldfield
Shane M. Cooley
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA
Ronald G. Oldfield*
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Ronald G. Oldfield, Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The co-occurrence of similar species in a particular environment may be facilitated if they specialise on different microhabitats, reducing competition between them. In some cases, two species prefer the same microhabitat, but one is competitively excluded to its harsh margins. In this study, we assessed microhabitat preferences and competition between two species of millipedes in Costa Rica. (1) We observed them in the wild and found Nyssodesmus python most often on wood, less often on leaves, and rarely on rocks. Spirobolida was found most often on leaves, less often on wood, and never on rocks. (2) We tested their preferences in the lab and found that N. python preferred wood to rocks, wood to leaves, and rocks to leaves. Spirobolida preferred leaves to rocks, leaves to wood, and wood to rocks. (3) We tested interference competition by placing both species together in an arena in which they both had the same preference (wood vs. rocks). Both species chose to cohabitate in the same wood, indicating that one species did not directly exclude the other. In N. python and Spirobolida, co-occurrence is facilitated by differences in microhabitat preferences and not because competition forces one species out of its preferred microhabitat.

Keywords

arthropodbiodiversityDiplopodaNyssodesmusSpirobolida
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Tropical Ecology , Volume 37 , Issue 5 , September 2021 , pp. 235 - 239
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adolph, SC and Geber, MA (1995) Mate-guarding, mating success and body size in the tropical millipede Nyssodesmus python (Peters)(Polydesmida: Platyrhacidae). The Southwestern Naturalist 40, 56–61.Google Scholar
Álvarez-Yépiz, JC, Búrquez, A, Martínez-Yrízar, A, Teece, M, Yépez, EA and Dovciak, M (2017) Resource partitioning by evergreen and deciduous species in a tropical dry forest. Oecologia 183, 607–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, RD (1982) Invertebrate Zoology. Philadelphia, PA: Holt-Saunders International, pp. 818–825.Google Scholar
Blower, JG (1985) Millipedes: Keys and notes for the identification of the species. In Kermack, DM and Barnes, RSK (eds), Synopses of the British Fauna (new series). London: Brill.Google Scholar
Borrell, BJ (2004) Mechanical properties of calcified exoskeleton from the neotropical millipede, Nyssodesmus python . Journal of Insect Physiology 50, 1121–1126.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, JH (2014) Why are there so many species in the tropics? Journal of Biogeography 41, 8–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chapman, A and Rosenberg, KV (1991) Diets of four sympatric Amazonian woodcreepers (Dendrocolaptidae). The Condor 93, 904–915.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connell, JH (1961) The influence of interspecific competition and other factors on the distribution of the barnacle Chthamalus stellatus . Ecology 42, 710–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crain, CM, Silliman, BR, Bertness, SL and Bertness, MD (2004) Physical and biotic drivers of plant distribution across estuarine salinity gradients. Ecology 85, 2539–2549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalton, RP and Lomvardas, S (2015) Chemosensory receptor specificity and regulation. Annual Review of Neuroscience 38, 331–349.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Enghoff, H (1983) Adaptive radiation of the millipede genus Cylindroiulus on Madeira: habitat, body size and morphology (Diplopoda, Julida: Julidae). Revue d’Ecologie et de Biologie du Sol 20, 403–415.Google Scholar
Gandhi, S (2005) Defense mechanisms of Nyssodesmus python (Polydesmidae). University of South Florida Libraries Digital Collections Tropical Ecology Collection [Monteverde Institute], usfldc doi: M39-00243. Retrieved from: https://digital.lib.usf.edu/SFS0001429/00001 Google Scholar
Hardin, G (1960) The competitive exclusion principle. Science 131, 1292–1297.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heisler, IL (1983) Nyssodesmus python . In Janzen, DH (ed.), Costa Rican Natural History. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp. 747–749.Google Scholar
Hoffman, RL (1999) Checklist of the millipedes of North and Middle America. Virginia Museum of Natural History Special Publications (581 pp.)Google Scholar
Hoffman, RL, Golovatch, SI, Adis, JU and Wellington de Morais, J (1996) Practical keys to the orders and families of millipedes of the Neotropical region (Myriapoda: Diplopoda). Amazoniana: Limnologia et Oecologia Regionalis Systematis Fluminis Amazonas 14, 1–35.Google Scholar
Hopkin, SP and Read, HJ (1992) The Biology of Millipedes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jepsen, DB, Winemiller, KO and Taphorn, DC (1997) Temporal patterns of resource partitioning among Cichla species in a Venezuelan blackwater river. Journal of Fish Biology 51, 1085–1108.Google Scholar
Kamath, A and Losos, JB (2017) Does ecological specialization transcend scale? Habitat partitioning among individuals and species of Anolis lizards. Evolution 71, 541–549.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewis, JGE (2008) The Biology of Centipedes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (pp. 110–111).Google Scholar
MacArthur, RH (1958) Population ecology of some warblers of northeastern coniferous forests. Ecology 39, 599–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McClearn, D, Arroyo-Mora, JP, Castro, E, Coleman, RC, Espeleta, JF, García-Robledo, C, Gilman, A, González, J, Joyce, AT, Kuprewicz, E and Longino, JT (2016) The Caribbean lowland evergreen moist and wet forests. In Kappelle, M (ed), Costa Rican Ecosystems. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp. 527–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonald, JH (2014) Handbook of biological statistics (3rd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Sparky House Publishing. Last revised July 20, 2015. (http://www.biostathandbook.com/chiind.html)Google Scholar
Moritz, L and Koch, M (2020) No Tömösváry organ in flat backed millipedes (Diplopoda, Polydesmida). Zookeys 930, 103–115. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.930.48438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, CM, González, G and Belén, J (2008) Ordinal abundance and richness of millipedes (Arthropoda: Diplopoda) in a subtropical wet forest in Puerto Rico. Acta Científica 22, 57–65.Google Scholar
O’Neill, RV (1967) Niche segregation in seven species of diplopods. Ecology 48, 983–983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Semenyuk, II and Tiunov, AV (2019) Foraging behaviour as a mechanism for trophic niche separation in a millipede community of southern Vietnam. European Journal of Soil Biology 90, 36–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shear, W (2011) Class Diplopoda de Blainville in Gervais, 1844. In Zhang Z-Q (ed.), Animal biodiversity: An outline of higher-level classification and survey of taxonomic richness. Zootaxa 3148, 159–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Summers, G and Uetz, GW (1979) Microhabitats of woodland centipedes in a streamside forest. American Midland Naturalist 102, 346–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vogel, JT, Somers, MJ and Venter, JA (2019) Niche overlap and dietary resource partitioning in an African large carnivore guild. Journal of Zoology 309, 212–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Cooley and Oldfield supplementary material

Cooley and Oldfield supplementary material

Download Cooley and Oldfield supplementary material(File)
File 13.5 KB