Match/mismatch

Edit links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The match/mismatch hypothesis (MMH) was first described by David Cushing (1969). The MMH "seeks to explain

predator demand. In ecological studies, a few examples include timing and extent of overlap of avian reproduction with the annual phenology of their primary prey items (Visser et al. 1998, Strode 2003), the interactions between herring fish reproduction and copepod spawning (Cushing 1990), the relationship between winter moth egg hatching and the timing of oak bud bursting (Visser & Holleman 2001), and the relationship between herbivore reproductive phenology with pulses in nutrients in vegetation [1][2]

Match

precocial
group of animals that can all move around and feed for themselves on the day they hatch (Tulp & Schekkerman 2008). In contrast most Passerines are altricial, and captured arthropods are provisioned by parents until they get reach maturity and gain independence (Tulp & Schekkerman 2008).

The insects of this region are also characterized by having a very short period of conspicuous activity. Many of them overwinter as

oviposition
will take place and the adult will then die.

Many arctic breeding

digestive systems (Meltofte et al. 2008). These are birds that use an income breeding strategy, and so upon arrival do not have sufficient stores of fat to begin ovulation
. Upon reaching the arctic, they must rebuild their digestive systems and be physiologically prepared to meet formidable conditions. This requires them to find an abundant prey source, and capitalize on it before they will be capable of laying a clutch (Meltofte et al. 2008).

If the bird arrives with sufficient time to recover these expended resources and lay their clutch with enough time to hatch at the period that prey density is going to be at its best, they will greatly increase the likelihood that those offspring are going to be given sufficient time to develop before they are forced back out of the arctic (Meltofte et al. 2008). If not, they risk a higher likelihood of nest depredation and a greater chance that the chicks will not have enough time to develop, and thus unable to fly independently back to a more temperate climate.

Mismatch

The complications of global changes such as climate change and other human activities are far from being thoroughly understood. We now understand what our actions are doing to the planet, but are still working out the details on the myriad ways in which our actions are disrupting our ecosystems. Almost all published examples of tropic mismatch are linked to climate change[3] However, human activities have impacted ecosystems globally an some of those activities could instigate trophic mismatch. A seminal example of human-mediated trophic mismatch that is globally relevant is between fire driven resource pulses and herbivore reproductive demands.[1] Humans have shifted fire season which shifted the resource pulse in vegation such that it no longer coincides with herbivore reproductive demands.[1] Importantly, it is highly likely that human-mediated trophic mismatch is common, but additional research identifying when and why they occur is needed.

Above the 60 degree latitude line, temperatures are expected to be raised by 2.5 °C by the middle of the 21st century (Kattsov et al. 2005). It is also projected that the annual mean

air temperature
will increase by 1 °C by 2020, 2 to 3 °C by 2050, and 4 to 5 °C by 2080 (Huntington & Weller 2005). Our current scientific understand still has a long way to go to truly understand the implications for these projections.

Top predators must coordinate their activities with their immediate lower prey on the

parasitization
risk. In recent years this is exactly what has been observed and the mechanisms relied upon for the phenology of each organism's respective issues is being altered by a change in the weather pattern and which aspect each responds to (Visser & Holleman 2001).

Things not susceptible to the match/mismatch hypothesis

Originally, the MMH was thought to apply only to

abiotic cues
(Durant et al. 2007). Typical instances also have the predator relying on an annually fixed abiotic cue, and the prey tends to use a cue that varies year to year (see above citations).

See also

References

  1. ^
    S2CID 246994356
    .
  2. S2CID 224999810
    .
  3. PMID 29666247
    .
  4. S2CID 246830106
    .
  5. PMID 27263989
    .
  6. doi:10.1111/ibi.12437
    .

Butler, M. G. (1980). Emergence Phenologies of Some Arctic Alaskan Chironomidae, In Murray, D. A., editor. Chironomidae. Ecology, Systematics, Cytology and Physiology. New York: Pergamon Press, 307–14.

Butler, M. G. (1982). A 7-year life cycle for two Chironomus species in arctic Alaskan tundra ponds (Diptera: Chironomidae). Canadian Journal of Zoology. Vol. 60, Number 1. pp. 58–70.

Cushing, D. H., (1969) The regularity of the spawning season of some fishes. J Cons Int Explor Mer 33:81–92

Cushing, D. H., (1990). Plankton production and year-class strength in fish populations: an update of the match/mismatch hypothesis. Advances in Marine Biology (eds) JHS Blaxter and AJ Southward. Academic Press Limited, San Diego, CA. pgs: 250–313.

Durant, J. M., Hjermann, D. Ø., Ottersen, G., & Stenseth, N. C. (2007). Climate and the match or mismatch between predator requirements and resource availability. Climate Research, 33(3), 271–283. Inter-Research, Nordbuente 23 Oldendorf/Luhe 21385 Germany, https://www.int-res.com/articles/cr_oa/c033p271.pdf.

Foster, R. G., & Kreitzman, L. (2009). Seasons of Life: The biological rhythms that enable living things to thrive and survive. Yale University Press.

ISBN 978-0-300-11556-7
. pp. 303. Huntington, H, & Weller, G. (2005) An Introduction to the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment. In Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 1–19.

Kattsov, V.M., Källén, E., Cattle, H., Christensen, J., Drange, H., Hanssen- Bauer, I., Jóhannesen, T., Karol, I., Räisänen, J., Svensson, G. et al. (2005). Future climate change: modeling and scenarios for the Arctic. In Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 99–150. Maclean, S. F., & Pitelka, F. A. (1971). Seasonal Patterns of Abundance of Tundra Arthropods near Barrow. Arctic, 24(1), 19–40.

Meltofte, H. (1996). African wintering waders really forced south by competition from northerly wintering conspecifics? Benefits and constraints of northern versus southern wintering. Ardea, 31–44. Retrieved from http://ardeajournal.natuurinfo.nl/ardeapdf/a84-031-044.pdf.

Meltofte, H., Hoye T. T., & Schmidt, N. M. (2008) Effects of Food Availability, Snow and Predation on Breeding Performance of Waders at Zackenberg. Advances in Ecological Research. Vol. 40

doi:10.1016/S0065-2504(07)00014-1
.

Samplonius, J.M., Kappers, E.F., Brands, S., Both, C. (2016). Phenological mismatch and ontogenetic diet shifts interactively affect offspring condition in a passerine. Journal of Animal Ecology,

doi:10.1111/1365-2656.12554
.

Schekkerman, H., Tulp, I., Piersma, T., & Visser, G. H. (2003). Mechanisms promoting higher growth rate in arctic than in temperate shorebirds. Oecologia, 134(3), 332–42.

doi:10.1007/s00442-002-1124-0
.

Strode, P. K. (2003). Implications of climate change for North American wood warblers (Parulidae). Global Change Biology, 9(8), 1137–1144.

doi:10.1046/j.1365-2486.2003.00664.x
.

Visser, M. E., Noordwijk, a J. V., Tinbergen, J. M., & Lessells, C. M. (1998). Warmer springs lead to mistimed reproduction in great tits (Parus major). Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 265(1408), 1867–1870.

doi:10.1098/rspb.1998.0514
.

Visser, M. E., & Holleman, L. J. (2001). Warmer springs disrupt the synchrony of oak and winter moth phenology. Proceedings: Biological Sciences, 268(1464), 289–94.

doi:10.1098/rspb.2000.1363
.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Match/mismatch&oldid=1206388887"