EVALUATING OPTIMAL DIET MODELS FOR AN AFRICAN BROWSING RUMINANT, THE KUDU - HOW CONSTRAINING ARE THE ASSUMED CONSTRAINTS

被引:46
作者
OWENSMITH, N
机构
[1] Centre for African Ecology, Department of Zoology, University of the Witwatersrand, Wits
关键词
DIGESTIVE CONSTRAINTS; FEEDING ECOLOGY; FORAGING THEORY; LINEAR PROGRAMMING; OPTIMAL DIET; TRAGELAPHUS-STREPSICEROS;
D O I
10.1007/BF01237644
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
The linear programming model (LPM) of Belovsky (1978, 1986) and modifications of the classical or contingency model incorporating a digestive constraint (CM) were tested using foraging data recorded for kudus (Tragelaphus strepsiceros) browsing savanna vegetation over the late wet season. Food choice was between the herbaceous and woody plant components for LPM and among plant species or categories for CM. The constraints considered were consumption (cropping) rate, foraging time and digestive capacity. Woody communities dominated by Burkea and Acacia represented alternative habitat types. Following a minor adjustment, LPM represented the overall average diet and predicted the dietary differences between habitat types. However, the kudus failed to respond dietarily to variations among days and foraging sessions (meals) in the parameters constraining intake. The kudus accepted a wider dietary range than predicted to be optimal by CM. Evidence suggested that neither foraging time, nor digestive capacity, formed an effective constraint under the study conditions. Thermal tolerance and gut space may become limiting only towards the extremes of environmental variability that animals experience. LPM is vulnerable to circularity if average parameter values are used to estimate constraint settings. The energy maximizer-time minimizer dichotomy fails to take into account the fitness consequences of alternative foraging responses. CM is less cryptic in its application than LPM and so has greater heuristic value, despite its predictive failures. However, there may be no consistent ranking of food types where multiple constraints that are variable in their effectiveness apply. Dynamic programming models offer a solution, but pose a formidable challenge in complex natural environments.
引用
收藏
页码:499 / 524
页数:26
相关论文
共 41 条
  • [1] Baker D.L., Hobbs N.T., Strategies of digestion: digestive efficiency and retention time of forage diets in montane ungulates, Can. J. Zool., 65, pp. 1978-84, (1987)
  • [2] Belovsky G.E., Diet optimization in a generalist herbivore: the moose, Theor. Popul. Biol., 14, pp. 105-34, (1978)
  • [3] Belovsky G.E., Herbivore optimal foraging: a comparative test of three models, Am. Nat., 124, pp. 97-115, (1984)
  • [4] Belovsky G.E., Optimal foraging and community structure: implications for a guild of generalist grassland herbivores, Oecologia, 70, pp. 35-52, (1986)
  • [5] Belovsky G.E., An optimal foraging model for wild herbivores, Herbivore Nutrition Research: Second International Symposium on the Nutrition of Herbivores, pp. 227-8, (1987)
  • [6] Belovsky G.E., How important are nutrient constraints in optimal foraging models, or are spatial/temporal factors more important?, Behavioral Mechanisms of Food Selection, pp. 255-80, (1990)
  • [7] Belovsky G.E., A reply to Hobbs, Behavioral Mechanisms of Food Selection, pp. 415-22, (1990)
  • [8] Belovsky G.E., Slade J.B., Time budgets of grassland herbivores: body size similarities, Oecologia, 70, pp. 52-62, (1986)
  • [9] Belovsky G.E., Ritchie M.E., Moorehead J., Foraging in complex environments: when prey availability varies over time and space, Theor. Pop. Biol., 36, pp. 144-60, (1989)
  • [10] Boomker E.A., Fermentation and digestion in the kudu, (1987)