PLANT-ANIMAL INTERACTIONS Instructor: Dr. Lee Dyer Office: ESB 308 Phone: 862-8288 Email: ldyer@tulane.edu Office hours: Wednesday: 100PM

COURSE OBJECTIVES:

This course is designed for graduate and undergraduate students in EE Biology (or related disciplines) with an interest in the evolution and ecology of plant-animal interactions. The main objectives of the course are:

1) To introduce biology students to the theories and methodologies which comprise the growing field of plant-animal interactions.

2) To familiarize students with classic and current literature in plant-animal interactions.

3) To introduce students to applied research in plant-animal interactions as well as applications of existing basic research and theory.

READING ASSIGNMENTS AND LECTURES:

It will be very important to read assigned journal articles before attending lectures. The information is there to give you a good background for lectures and discussions. Class participation is part of your grade. Most Thursdays will consist of discussions of papers.

ASSIGNMENTS AND GRADING POLICY:

There will be 3 critiques of scientific papers (each worth approximately 20% of your grade), brief oral presentations (worth approximately 20% of your grade), and a final debate (approximately 20% of your grade). Overall class participation is worth approximately 5% of your grade.

TENTATIVE LECTURE SCHEDULE:

Week	Reading Assignment	Topic
Jan 18	Paper 1	Introduction to the course. A model system.
Jan 25	Paper 2	Introduction – Phytophagous animals.
Feb 1	Papers 3-5	Introduction – Plant defenses.
Feb 8	Papers 6-8	Ant plant interactions; Carnivorous plants.
Feb 15	Papers 9-12	Major determinants of diversity, part 1.
Feb 15		Critique #1 due
Mar 8	Papers 13-14	Major determinants of diversity, part 2.
Mar 8	Papers 15-18	Top-down vs. bottom-up regulation of herbivores.
Mar 15	Papers 19-21	Indirect interactions.
Mar 22		Critique #2 due
Mar 22	Papers 22-23	Coevolution
Mar 22	Papers 24-25	Specialization.
Mar 29	Papers 26-28	Pollination biology.
Apr 5	Papers 29-32	Pollination biology.
Apr 12	Papers 33-34	Pest Management.
Apr 19	Papers 35-40	Land Management.
Apr 26		Final discussion. Critique #3 due
Apr 28	Paper 41	Don Strong lecture

FINAL DISCUSSION: WEDNESDAY, April 26, 630-9PM

READINGS

The following papers (with the exception of Paper 1) must be read before the class meets. Students will be randomly selected to lead discussions of selected papers (starting January 29).

Paper 1

Dyer, L.A. and D.K. Letourneau. 2003. Top-down and bottom-up diversity cascades in detrital versus living food webs. Ecology Letters 6:60-68.

Paper 2

Bailey, J. K., and T. G. Whitham. 2003. Interactions among elk, aspen, galling sawflies and insectivorous birds. Oikos 101:127-134.

Papers 3-5

Stamp, N. 2003. Out of the quagmire of plant defense hypotheses. Quarterly Review of Biology 78:23-55.

Koricheva, J. 2002. Meta-analysis of sources of variation in fitness costs of plant antiherbivore defenses. Ecology 83:176-190.

Ayres, M. P., T. P. Clausen, S. F. MacLean, A. M. Redman, and P. B. Reichardt. 1997. Diversity of structure and antiherbivore activity in condensed tannins. Ecology 78:1696-1712.

Papers 6-8

Heil, M., and D. McKey. 2003. Protective ant-plant interactions as model systems in ecological and evolutionary research. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics 34:425-453.

Fraser AM, Axen AH, Pierce NE (2001) Assessing the quality of different ant species as partners of a myrmecophilous butterfly. Oecologia 129:452-460

Palmer, T. M., M. L. Stanton, and T. P. Young. 2003. Competition and coexistence: Exploring mechanisms that restrict and maintain diversity within mutualist guilds. American Naturalist 162:S63-S79.

Papers 9-10+

Koricheva, J., C. P. H. Mulder, B. Schmid, J. Joshi, and K. Hustler. 2000. Numerical responses of different trophic groups of invertebrates to manipulations of plant diversity in grasslands. Oecologia 125, 271-282.

Siemann, E., D. Tilman, J. Haarstad, and M. Ritchie. 1998. Experimental tests of the dependence of arthropod diversity on plant diversity. American Naturalist 152:738-750.

Vehvila¨inen, H., J. Koricheva, K. Ruohomaki, T. Johansson, and S. Valkonen. 2006. Effects of tree stand species composition on insect herbivory of silver birch in boreal forests. Basic and Applied Ecology 7:1-11.

Papers 11-12

Karban, R. 1989. Community organization of Erigeron glaucus folivores: effects of competition, predation, and host plant. Ecology 70:1028-1039.

Christensen, K.M. and T.G. Whitham. 1993. Impact of insect herbivores on competition between birds and mammals for pinyon pine seeds. Ecology 74:2270-2278.

Papers 13-14+

Wright, S.J. 2002. Plant diversity in tropical forests: a review of mechanisms of species coexistence. Oecologia 130:1-14.

Carson, W. P. and R. B. Root. 2000. Herbivory and plant species coexistence: Community regulation by an outbreaking phytophagous insect. Ecological Monographs 70:73-99.

Schmitz, O. J. 2003. Top predator control of plant biodiversity and productivity in an old-field ecosystem. Ecology Letters 6:156-163.

Papers 15-18+

Hunter, M.D. 2001. Multiple approaches to estimating the relative importance of top-down and bottom-up forces on insect populations: Experiments, life tables, and time-series analysis. Basic and Applied Ecology 2:295-309

Krebs, C.J., Boutin, S., Boonstra, R., Sinclair, A.R.E., Smith, J.N.M., Dale, M.R.T., Martin, K. and Turkington, R. 1995. Impact of food and predation on the snowshoe hare cycle. Science 1112-1115.

Vinson, S. B. 1999. Parasitoid manipulation as a plant defense strategy. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 92:812-828.

Walker, M. and T. H. Jones. 2001. Relative roles of top-down and bottom-up forces in terrestrial tritrophic plant-insect herbivore-natural enemy systems. Oikos 93:177-187.

Sinclair, A. R. E., S. Mduma, and J. S. Brashares. 2003. Patterns of predation in a diverse predator-prey system. Nature 425:288-290.

Papers 19-21+

Halaj, J. and D. H. Wise. 2001. Terrestrial trophic cascades: How much do they trickle? American Naturalist 157:262-281.

Polis, G. A. 1999. Why are parts of the world green? Multiple factors control productivity and the distribution of biomass. Oikos 86:3-15.

Snyder, W. E. and D. H. Wise. 2001. Contrasting trophic cascades generated by a community of generalist predators. Ecology 82:1571-1583.

Shurin, J. B., E. T. Borer, E. W. Seabloom, K. Anderson, C. A. Blanchette, B. Broitman, S. D. Cooper, and B. S. Halpern. 2002. A cross-ecosystem comparison of the strength of trophic cascades. Ecology Letters 5:785-791.

Papers 22-23+

Janzen, D.H. 1980. When is it Coevolution? Evolution 34:611-2.

Cornell, H. V. and B. A. Hawkins. 2003. Herbivore responses to plant secondary compounds: A test of phytochemical coevolution theory. American Naturalist 161:507-522.

Labandeira, C. C., D. L. Dilcher, D. R. Davis, and D. L. Wagner. 1994. 97-Million years of Angiosperm-insect association - paleobiological insights into the meaning of coevolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 91:12278-12282.

Papers 24-25

Bernays EA (1998) Evolution of feeding behavior in insect herbivores - Success seen as different ways to eat without being eaten. Bioscience 48:35-44.

Stamp, N. 2001. Enemy-free space via host plant chemistry and dispersion: assessing the influence of tri-trophic interactions. Oecologia 128:153-163.

Papers 26-28

Ecology special feature: Linking herbivory and pollination. Ecology 78:1617-1672. (paper 26 is the Armbruster paper, paper 27 is the Strauss paper)

Schmalhofer VR (2001) Tritrophic interactions in a pollination system: impacts of species composition and size of flower patches on the hunting success of a flower-dwelling spider. Oecologia 129:292-303

Papers 29-32

Aigner PA (2001) Optimality modeling and fitness trade-offs: when should plants become pollinator specialists? Oikos 95:177-184

Gronquist M, Bezzerides A, Attygalle A, Meinwald J, Eisner M, Eisner T (2001) Attractive and defensive functions of the ultraviolet pigments of a flower (Hypericum calycinum). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 98:13745-13750

Schemske D.W., Bradshaw H.D. 1999. Pollinator preference and the evolution of floral traits in monkeyflowers (Mimulus). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 96:11910-11915.

Gorelick, R. 2001. Did insect pollination cause increased seed plant diversity? Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 74:407-427.

Papers 33-34

Gross, P., B. A. Hawkins, H. V. Cornell, and B. Hosmane. 2006. Using lower trophic level factors to predict outcomes in classical biological control of insect pests. Basic and Applied Ecology 6:571-584.

Lundgren, J. G., and R. N. Wiedenmann. 2005. Tritrophic interactions among Bt (CryMb1) corn, aphid prey, and the predator Coleomegilla maculata (Coleoptera : Coccinellidae). Environmental Entomology 34:1621-1625.

Papers 35-40

Abbey, Edward. 1986. Even the bad guys wear white hats: Cowboys, ranchers, and ruin of the West. Harper’s Jan:51-55.

Lau, J. A., and S. Y. Strauss. 2005. Insect herbivores drive important indirect effects of exotic plants on native communities. Ecology 86:2990-2997.

Carvell C (2002) Habitat use and conservation of bumblebees (Bombus spp.) under different grassland management regimes. Biological Conservation 103:33-49

Preisser, E. L., and D. R. Strong. 2004. Climate affects predator control of an herbivore outbreak. American Naturalist 163:754-762.

Hayward, B., Heske, E.J., and C.W. Painter.1997. Effects of livestock grazing on small mammals at a desert cienaga. Journal of Wildlife Management 61:123-129.

Power, M. 2001. Field biology, food web models, and mangement: challenges of context and scale. Oikos 94:118-129.

Paper 41

Harrison, S., A. Hastings, and D. R. Strong. 2005. Spatial and temporal dynamics of insect outbreaks in a complex multitrophic system: tussock moths, ghost moths, and their natural enemies on bush lupines. Annales Zoologici Fennici 42:409-419.

GUIDELINES FOR DISCUSSIONS

Beginning February 1, we will discuss papers each week. Be prepared to lead a discussion or to take part in a discussion of the paper. Be able to briefly summarize the background, methods used, and main conclusions of the paper (10-15 minutes). Prepare at least 1 methodological question and 2 theoretical questions to ask the class or the discussion leader. You should also be prepared to answer the questions that you pose. Methodological questions include questions such as, “Would correlational data have helped put these experiments into perspective?” or “Did the authors choose the appropriate scale to test this question?” Theoretical questions include questions such as, “Was it reasonable for the authors to assume that specialization is always derived?” or “Are these results relevant to other systems?”

GUIDELINES FOR CRITIQUES

Due dates: Feb 15, Mar 8, Apr 26; I cannot accept late papers.

Length: 1.5 page (single space, 2 cm margins all around) minimum – 2.5 pages maximum; it must be typed.

Value: 50 points each.

Acceptable topics:

Anything related to issues that have been covered in class by the due date of the critique and after the due date of the previous critique.

Do not use papers from the reading list. Papers in Science and Nature are not acceptable.

Acceptable Journals (NOTE: the article must be from 2000 or more recent)

American Naturalist

Biological Conservation

Conservation Biology

Ecological Applications

Ecological Monographs

Ecological Entomology

Ecology

Ecology Letters

Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata

Environmental Entomology

Evolution

Oecologia

Oikos

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA

Journal of Animal Ecology

Journal of Chemical Ecology

Journal of Insect Behavior

Journal of Insect Conservation

Journal of Wildlife Management

Format:

1. Provide the complete citation of the article at the top.
2. Summarize the entire article (this should consist of one short paragraph).
3. Critique the article (i.e. what was good about it, what was bad about it); this is the main component of the assignment.
4. Explain why this article is important for ecology or evolutionary biology.
5. Attach a copy of the first page or the abstract of the article.
6. In your critique, provide at least 2 references to support your criticisms (either positive or negative). These references should be novel in that they should not be cited in the paper you are reviewing.