title: Interpopulation differences in competitive effect and response of the mosquito Aedes aegypti and resistance to invasion by a superior competitor.
abstract: Geographic variation in species interactions can have major effects on species distributions and can be important for the resistance of resident communities to invasive species. We tested the hypothesis that coexistence or replacement of a resident North American mosquito Aedes aegypti with the invasive Aedes albopictus is affected by interpopulation variation in the inherent competitive ability of A. aegypti and variation in the fecundity-size relationship. We postulated that such variation creates differential population-level outcomes of competition with A. albopictus. We compared competitive abilities of eight North American populations of A. aegypti, four populations sympatric to A. albopictus, and four populations allopatric to A. albopictus. Competition among larvae from each A. aegypti population and a single A. albopictus population was tested in laboratory microcosms in a response-surface design. We found origin of A. aegypti influences its competitive response to competition from A. albopictus and competitive effect on A. albopictus. A. aegypti from allopatric sites preformed better in competition with A. albopictus than did A. aegypti from sympatric sites because they had a stronger average effect on A. albopictus. This average was strongly influenced by the allopatric population from Miami. Competitive effect and response were uncorrelated among populations, indicating inconsistent ranking of A. aegypti in competitive effect and response. Although A. albopictus is generally a superior competitor to A. aegypti, a stronger competitive effect of particular A. aegypti populations on invading A. albopictus may contribute to competition-mediated biotic resistance to the invader. These results suggest that interpopulation variation in competitive ability of A. aegypti may contribute to failure of A. albopictus to invade parts of the southeastern United States and offer evidence of a contribution to biotic resistance by an inferior competitor. Geographic variation in competitive ability may be common and one general cause of variation in invasion success and impact.
authors.affiliation: School of Biological Sciences, Behavior, Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics Section, Illinois State University, Normal, IL 61761-4120, USA. leisnham@umd.edu
authors.forename: Paul T
authors.initials: PT
authors.lastname: Leisnham
authors.forename: S A
authors.initials: SA
authors.lastname: Juliano
mesh_terms: D000330:Aedes / Q000254:growth & development*; D000818:Animals; D003163:Competitive Behavior; D005260:Female; D005431:Florida; D058865:Introduced Species; D008297:Male; D055820:New Orleans; D052287:Oviparity; D011158:Population Growth
references.citation: Ecology. 2009 Sep;90(9):2405-13
references.pmid: 19769119
references.citation: Oecologia. 2002 Feb 1;130(3):458-469
references.pmid: 20871747
references.citation: Ecol Lett. 2008 Aug;11(8):852-66
references.pmid: 18422638
references.citation: Ecology. 2005 Dec;86(12):3279-3288
references.pmid: 19096729
references.citation: J Am Mosq Control Assoc Suppl. 1988 Dec;1:1-39
references.pmid: 3068349
references.citation: J Med Entomol. 2008 Mar;45(2):210-21
references.pmid: 18402136
references.citation: Ecology. 2005 Dec;86(12):3289-95
references.pmid: 17450188
references.citation: Ecology. 2006 Jul;87(7):1770-80
references.pmid: 16922326
references.citation: Monogr Popul Biol. 1982;17:1-296
references.pmid: 7162524
references.citation: J Med Entomol. 2002 Jul;39(4):699-704
references.pmid: 12144308
references.citation: J Med Entomol. 2008 May;45(3):375-83
references.pmid: 18533429
references.citation: Oecologia. 2004 May;139(4):583-93
references.pmid: 15024640
references.citation: J Med Entomol. 1995 Jul;32(4):554-62
references.pmid: 7650719
references.citation: J Vector Ecol. 2004 Dec;29(2):277-84
references.pmid: 15707287
references.citation: J Med Entomol. 2005 Jul;42(4):559-70
references.pmid: 16119544
references.citation: Proc Biol Sci. 2008 Feb 22;275(1633):463-71
references.pmid: 18077250
references.citation: Am Nat. 2001 Feb;157(2):126-40
references.pmid: 18707267
references.citation: Science. 2000 May 5;288(5467):852-4
references.pmid: 10797006
references.citation: Monogr Ser World Health Organ. 1962;47:13-191
references.pmid: 13885800
references.citation: Ecol Lett. 2008 Jul;11(7):674-81
references.pmid: 18400019
references.citation: Annu Rev Entomol. 2002;47:233-66
references.pmid: 11729075
references.citation: J Med Entomol. 1989 Jul;26(4):260-71
references.pmid: 2769704
references.citation: Med Vet Entomol. 2009 Mar;23(1):62-8
references.pmid: 19239615
references.citation: Annu Rev Entomol. 2009;54:37-56
references.pmid: 19067629
references.citation: Oecologia. 1998 Jun;115(1-2):137-148
references.pmid: 28308444
references.citation: J Vector Ecol. 2002 Jun;27(1):86-95
references.pmid: 12125878
references.citation: J Med Entomol. 1999 May;36(3):313-20
references.pmid: 10337101