IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v13y2002i2p260-267.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Kleptoparasitism and the distribution of unequal competitors

Author

Listed:
  • Ian M. Hamilton

Abstract

Kleptoparasitism is an important means by which many animals obtain limited resources. The success of kleptoparasitism may be influenced by a number of factors, including competitive differences among individuals and the spatial distribution of prey and hosts. I used ideal free distribution (IFD) theory to predict the spatial distribution of kleptoparasites and their hosts between two patches differing in quality and to predict how the use of kleptoparasitism was influenced by the relative searching and fighting abilities of classes of competitors. Unlike previous IFD models incorporating kleptoparasitism, I allowed competitors to choose between attempting kleptoparasitism or searching for undefended prey. When the rates of resource inputs into the patches were high, the model predicted little use of kleptoparasitism. If competitive types were equally able to displace others from resources, then those individuals that were poorer at searching for food were more likely to kleptoparasitize. If competitive types differed in their abilities to displace others, kleptoparasites were exclusively those individuals that were best able to do so. Regardless of their competitive type, a higher proportion of individuals in the high-quality patch were kleptoparasitic, while the total density of competitors in the high-quality patch was lower than that expected based on the ratio of resource inputs. These predictions differ from previous IFD models of kleptoparasitism, suggesting that the mechanisms involved in searching for and obtaining resources can influence the spatial distribution of animals. Copyright 2002.

Suggested Citation

  • Ian M. Hamilton, 2002. "Kleptoparasitism and the distribution of unequal competitors," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 13(2), pages 260-267, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:13:y:2002:i:2:p:260-267
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:13:y:2002:i:2:p:260-267. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.