It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Habitat selection, the choice of a habitat based on its perceived quality, is a key mechanism structuring freshwater communities. To date, individual variability in habitat selection has been neglected, and specialisation has never been considered in this type of studies. We examined the individual differences in the habitat selection of backswimmers (Notonectidae) and diving beetles (Dytiscidae). From each family, we selected one habitat generalist able to coexist with fish (Notonecta glauca, Dytiscus marginalis), and one species specialised to fishless habitats (Notonecta obliqua, Acilius sulcatus). We performed a mesocosm experiment quantifying the consistency in individuals’ decisions in response to fish and vegetation structure, in relation to sex and specialisation. Neither the overall pattern of preferences nor consistency in individuals’ decisions differed between specialists and generalists or between the sexes, but both were consistent within families. At the population level, backswimmers preferred fishless pools with submersed and floating macrophytes, while diving beetles showed no clear preferences. Individual decisions of backswimmers were consistent and likely driven by conspecific/heterospecific attraction. In diving beetles, individual decisions were primarily density-dependent. Our results reinforce the significance of habitat selectivity for aquatic community assembly, while suggesting a range of mechanisms driving variability in individual behaviour.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 University of Ostrava, Department of Biology and Ecology, Faculty of Science, Ostrava, Czech Republic (GRID:grid.412684.d) (ISNI:0000 0001 2155 4545); Palacký University, Department of Zoology, Faculty of Science, Olomouc, Czech Republic (GRID:grid.10979.36) (ISNI:0000 0001 1245 3953)
2 University of Ostrava, Department of Biology and Ecology, Faculty of Science, Ostrava, Czech Republic (GRID:grid.412684.d) (ISNI:0000 0001 2155 4545)
3 Czech University of Life Sciences, Department of Ecology, Faculty of Environmental Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic (GRID:grid.15866.3c) (ISNI:0000 0001 2238 631X)