5.

Intraspecific competition
 Introduction
o Up to now: focus on how organisms grow, reproduce and
die – conditions and resources that affect them
o Organisms do not live in isolation – part of a population
at least for parts of their life
o Individual of same species  very similar requirements
for survival growth and reproduction
o Individuals compete for a resource  some of them
become deprived.
Intraspecific competition

o Interaction between individuals brought about by a

shared requirement for a resource
o Leading to the reduction in survivorship, growth and/or
reproduction of at least some of the competing
individuals concerned
o E.g. population of grasshoppers that feed on specific
grass species
o The more grasshoppers, the more the grasshoppers
will have to expend energy to find food
o  more energy consumed for food, the less used for
survival, growth and reproduction which determines
the grasshopper contribution to next generation
 Exploitation

o Individuals might not

interact with each other
directly
o BUT respond to level of
resource reduced by
presence + activity of other
individuals
o  exploitative competition
o Occurs if resource in limited
supply
 Interference

o Individuals interact directly

with each other
o One individual  prevent
an other from exploiting the
resource within a portion of
an habitat
o E.g. animals defending
territories
 One-sided

o Competition effect very different for individuals

o Weak competitors  no contribution to next generation
o Strong competitors  not really affected
o More crowded, greater effect of competition
 Density dependent
 Tribolium confusum experiment on
density dependence

o E.g. experiment on flour beetles

o Effect of density dependence on
mortality and fecundity because of
intraspecific competition
o Known number of eggs placed in a
glass tube with 0.5g of flour
o Recordings of individuals that
became adults in each tube
Tribolium confusum experiment on
density dependence (cont.)

Region 1: Region 2:
Mortality – constant Mortality – increasing
Nb dying – increasing Nb dying – increasing
Nb surviving – increasing Nb surviving – increasing
 Mortality density independent  Mortality density dependent
Tribolium confusum experiment on
density dependence (cont.)

Region 3:
Intraspecific competition occur here
Increase mortality rate overcompensate for increase in density
 Decrease of number of individuals surviving to adult stage
 Exact compensating competition

o At low density
 under-compensation
o At high density
 mortality never
overcompensated

for every rise in

number of fish, exact
match of mortality rate
Density and crowding

o Intensity of competition experienced by an individual not

determined by density of population
o Extent in which it is inhabited by his neighbors
o Density in ecology often measured as number of
individuals per unit area
o Average density = total no of individuals/size of habitat
(Resource weighted density)
Density and crowding (cont.)
o Average density = total no of individuals/size of habitat
(Resource weighted density)
o E.g.1 : 1000 insects and a 100 plants
o  Resource weighted density = 10 insects per plants
o E.g.2: 10 plants that support 91 insects and 90 plants
support 1 insect
o Organism weighted density = 91 * 910 /1000 + 1*90
/1000 = 82.9
 Carrying capacity

o As density increases, birth

decreases and mortality rate
increases
o If either birth or death are
density-dependent, they
have to cross at a specific
density
o Density as cross-over is
carrying capacity

Carrying capacity = population size at resources in this

environment that can just maintain without the population
either increasing or decreasing
 Intraspecific competition

oNot only affects numbers but

growth as well
oUnitary organisms – more
individuals but smaller above a
certain density
oModular organisms – law of
constant yield - yield stays the
same but plant size reduced
Quantifying intraspecific competition

ok => summarize the effect of intraspecific

competition on mortality, fecundity and growth
ok = log(initial density) – log (final density)
oOr equivalently: k = log(initial density/final density)
oOr k = log(B/A), where B initial density (before the
action of intraspecific competition) and A for
numbers after the action of competition
oNote that k increases as the fraction of survivors
increases.
Relationship between the k factor and logNt
describe the degree of competition

o Examples of effect of intraspecific competition

Plotting the k against the log of B
o K constant at low densities  density independence
o As densities get higher, k increases with initial density  density
dependence
Relationship between the k factor and logNt
describe the degree of competition

o Figure a and b: situations with undercompensation and exact

compensation
o Exact compensation in figure b  slope of the curve taking a
constant value of 1
o Undercompensation in figure a  slope b being less than 1
Relationship between the k factor and logNt
describe the degree of competition

o Pure scramble = most extreme form of overcompensating (Figure

c)
o b larger than 1 and approaching infinity
Models

oExtract the essentials out of complex systems

oCommon language in which each unique example
can be expressed
oProperties relative to each other will be more
apparent
oModels can exhibit properties that the system being
studied were not thought to possess
 Models for discrete breeding seasons
o2 equations:
o Nt = N0Rt
o Nt+1 = NtR
oNo competition
oR subject to intraspecific competition
oFigure 5.19 -> 3 components
o A: population very small
 Competition negligeable
o R unmodified
o Rearranged equation:
o Nt/Nt+1 = 1/R
Models for discrete breeding seasons (cont.)
oB: population much larger
o Significant intraspecific competition
o Birth = deaths
oNt+1 = Nt  Nt /Nt+1 = 1
 carrying capacity K
o Straight line joining point A to B
and beyond
o Progressive modification of actual
net reproductive rate
oy = (slope) x + intercept
Deriving Population Models

oY = MX + C
𝑁𝑁𝑡𝑡 1−1/𝑅𝑅
o = × 𝑁𝑁𝑡𝑡 + 1/𝑅𝑅
𝑁𝑁𝑡𝑡+1 𝐾𝐾

o Or

o𝑁𝑁𝑡𝑡+1 = 𝑁𝑁𝑡𝑡 𝑅𝑅
𝑅𝑅−1 𝑁𝑁𝑡𝑡
1+
𝐾𝐾
o If (R-1)/K is replaced by α:
𝑁𝑁𝑡𝑡 𝑅𝑅
o𝑁𝑁𝑡𝑡+1 =
(1+𝑎𝑎𝑁𝑁𝑡𝑡)
Differential equations

oPrevious model  appropriate for populations with

discrete breeding seasons
oPopulations with overlapping generations 
differential equations
oNet rate of increase = dN/dt, speed population
increases in size, N, as time, t, progresses
oPer capita rate of increase = dN/dt*(1/N) = r
(intrinsic rate of natural increase in an uncrowded
situation)
oNet rate of increase dN/dt = rN
 Continuous reproduction : Logistic
growth
o Intraspecific competition still need
to be accounted for
o Graph here: decrease in r as
density increases
o Point A = r  rate not influenced
by low densities but as densities
increases, r decreases to 0 
carrying capacity at point B
o dN/dt(1/N) = r-(r/K)N
o Rearranged: dN/dt = rN(K-N/K) (K-N) / K = density independence
or environmental resistance
Logistic growth (cont.)
 Asymmetrical competition and
territoriality
o Competition also impacts individuals
o Here: different sizes of plants that were
planted at different densities (low,
medium, high)
o Plant harvested at different times
(2 weeks, 6 weeks and full maturity)
o At low densities: weight of plants very
symmetrical
o As density increases: distribution becomes
strongly left skewed
o  many individuals are small / few are
large
o The longer the competition, fewer
individuals large and lots of small
individuals
Preempting resources

o Competition can exaggerate

inequalities
o 8 weeks period, the smaller the
plant, the more affected by
neighbors
o Plants that prehend the space at
beginning  little affected by
other plants
o  asymmetric competition when
some individuals more
influenced than others
o A few individuals dominate for
long periods of time  enhance
regulations in a population
 Territoriality
o Active interference between individuals so
that more or less exclusive area (territory)
is defended against intruders through
recognizable pattern of activity
o Individual failing to gain a territory => no
contribution to future generations
=> population regulation
o Populations with territories = more stable
through time (don’t overshoot carrying
capacity and more persistent over time)
o Costs: defending and patrolling territory
o E.g. Cichlid fish that defends food patches
o  evolution favouring intermediate patch
size