Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
36
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
36 results for “interference competition”
Data from: An empirical test of the mechanistic underpinnings of interference competition
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Data from: Balancing selection for aflatoxin in Aspergillus flavus is maintained through interference competition with, and fungivory by insects
The role of microbial secondary metabolites in the ecology of the organisms that produce them remains poorly understood. Variation in aflatoxin production by Aspergillus flavus is maintained by balancing selection, but the ecological function and impact on fungal fitness of this compound are unknown. We hypothesize that balancing selection for aflatoxin production in A. flavus is driven by interaction with insects. To test this, we competed naturally occurring aflatoxigenic and non-aflatoxigenic fungal isolates against Drosophila larvae on medium containing 0–1750 ppb aflatoxin, using quantitative PCR to quantify A. flavus DNA as a proxy for fungal fitness. The addition of aflatoxin across this range resulted in a 26-fold increase in fungal fitness. With no added toxin, aflatoxigenic isolates caused higher mortality of Drosophila larvae and had slightly higher fitness than non-aflatoxigenic isolates. Additionally, aflatoxin production increased an average of 1.5-fold in the presence of a single larva and nearly threefold when the fungus was mechanically damaged. We argue that the role of aflatoxin in protection from fungivory is inextricably linked to its role in interference competition. Our results, to our knowledge, provide the first clear evidence of a fitness advantage conferred to A. flavus by aflatoxin when interacting with insects.
Data from: A shift from exploitation to interference competition with increasing density affects population and community dynamics
Intraspecific competition influences population and community dynamics and occurs via two mechanisms. Exploitative competition is an indirect effect that occurs through use of a shared resource and depends on resource availability. Interference competition occurs by obstructing access to a resource and may not depend on resource availability. Our study tested whether the strength of interference competition changes with protozoa population density. We grew experimental microcosms of protozoa and bacteria under different combinations of protozoan density and basal resource availability. We then solved a dynamic predator–prey model for parameters of the functional response using population growth rates measured in our experiment. As population density increased, competition shifted from exploitation to interference, and competition was less dependent on resource levels. Surprisingly, the effect of resources was weakest when competition was the most intense. We found that at low population densities, competition was largely exploitative and resource availability had a large effect on population growth rates, but the effect of resources was much weaker at high densities. This shift in competitive mechanism could have implications for interspecific competition, trophic interactions, community diversity, and natural selection. We also tested whether this shift in the mechanism of competition with protozoa density affected the structure of the bacterial prey community. We found that both resources and protozoa density affected the structure of the bacterial prey community, suggesting that competitive mechanism may also affect trophic interactions.
Fig. 1 in Interference Competition and Cannibalism by Dorcus rectus(Motschulsky) (Coleoptera: Lucanidae) Larvae in the Laboratory and Field
Fig. 1. Allometry of larval body mass (mg ) on head capsule
Interference competition between wolves and coyotes during variable prey abundance
<ul> <li> <a name="_Hlk57016985"> Interference competition occurs when two species have similar resource requirements and one species is dominant and can suppress or exclude the subordinate species. </a>Wolves (<i>Canis lupus</i>) and coyotes (<i>C. latrans</i>) are sympatric across much of their range in North America where white-tailed deer (<i>Odocoileus virginianus</i>) can be an important prey species. We assessed the extent of niche overlap between wolves and coyotes using activity, diet, and space use as evidence for interference competition during 3 periods related to the availability of white-tailed deer fawns in the Upper Great Lakes region of the USA.</li> <li>We assessed activity overlap (Δ) with data from accelerometers onboard global positioning system (GPS) collars worn by wolves (<i>n</i> = 11) and coyotes (<i>n</i> = 13). We analyzed wolf and coyote scat to estimate dietary breadth (<i>B</i>) and food niche overlap (α). We used resource utilization functions (RUFs) with canid GPS location data, white-tailed deer RUFs, ruffed grouse (<i>Bonasa umbellus</i>) and snowshoe hare (<i>Lepus americanus</i>) densities, and landscape covariates to compare population-level space use.</li> <li>Wolves and coyotes exhibited considerable overlap in activity (Δ = 0.86–0.92), diet (<i>B</i> = 3.1–4.9; α = 0.76–1.0), and space use of active and inactive RUFs across time periods. Coyotes relied less on deer as prey compared to wolves and consumed greater amounts of smaller prey items. Coyotes exhibited greater population-level variation in space use compared to wolves. <a name="_Hlk57643527">Additionally, while active and inactive, coyotes exhibited greater selection of some land covers as compared to wolves.</a> </li> <li>Our findings lend support for interference competition between wolves and coyotes with significant overlap across resource attributes examined. The mechanisms through which wolves and coyotes coexist appear driven largely by how coyotes, a generalist species, exploit narrow differences in resource availability and display greater population-level plasticity in resource use.</li> </ul>
Seasonal variation in the strength of interference competition among headwater stream predators
<p>1. Vertebrate communities in headwater streams are assumed to be regulated through competitive and predatory interactions. Although documented predation is rare, studies regularly report competitive dominance by fish that, as larger competitors reliant on aquatic habitat, exclude semi-aquatic salamanders to marginal stream habitat. However, it is unclear whether fish interact with stream-breeding salamanders through indirect effects such as, competition for resources (e.g., food or cover) or fear (i.e., threat of predation) nor is it known whether these interactions are consistent through time.</p> <p>2. This study used a novel caging approach to determine if competitive outcomes between a headwater fish and salamanders were regulated primarily through resource depletion (exploitative competition) or behavioural avoidance (interference competition).</p> <p>3. We paired banded sculpin (<i>Cottus carolinae</i>) and larval red salamanders (<i>Pseudotriton ruber</i>) of similar body size in independent flow through mesocosms with intra- and inter-specific pairs allowed to interact physically or non-physically. The experiment was repeated in the fall and in the spring when stream salamander larvae begin to transform into terrestrial juveniles.</p> <p>4. Banded sculpin negatively influenced growth of red salamanders regardless of whether they were allowed to physically interact, suggesting interference competition and behavioural avoidance. This asymmetrical effect was strongest in the spring when salamanders underwent metamorphosis at higher rates in the presence of fish. However, in the fall, the effects were more balanced between the two species with salamanders impacting fish through exploitative competition.</p> <p>5. By studying the temporal relationships between two competitors and using a caging method novel to competition studies, we established that the outcomes of competition are dependent on season and may vary in type relative to the timing of life history events. For this community, these results suggest that outcomes of competition are highly dependent on season and could indicate a biotic mechanism maintaining headwater salamander distributions through source-sink dynamics. Our results also suggest that, in this species interaction, it may be unwarranted to assume that the outcomes of competition at one time represent the complex relationships regulating community interactions.</p>
Carcass scavenging relaxes chemical-driven female interference competition in flour beetles
<p>Female-female nonsexual interference competition is a major fitness determinant of biased sex-ratio groups with high female density. <span>What strategies can females use to overcome the negative impact of this competition? </span><span>We used flour beetle <i>Tribolium castaneum</i> </span>to answer this question, where competing females <span>from female-biased groups were already known to suppress each other's fecundity by secreting toxic quinones from their stink glands, indicating a unique chemical-driven interference competition. Surprisingly, </span><span>increasing resources</span><span> did not alleviate these fitness costs. Females also did not </span>disperse more from the site of interference competition. Hence, the <span>competition was neither influenced by the total resource availability nor the lack of opportunity to </span>avoid chemical interference<span>. Instead, protein sequestered via scavenging of nutrient-rich carcasses relaxed female competition, by increasing their fecundity and reducing the quinone content. Finally, stink gland components themselves triggered carcass-scavenging and increased fecundity, indicating the possibility of a novel chemical-driven feedback loop</span> to reduce the competition. Taken together, in the present work, we could provide the rare analyses where multiple competing hypotheses were jointly tested to establish carcass-scavenging as an important potential strategy to overcome the fitness costs of intrasexual female interference competition.</p>
Supplementary material 2 from: Kobak J, Rachalewski M, Bącela-Spychalska K (2021) What doesn't kill you doesn't make you stronger: Parasites modify interference competition between two invasive amphipods. NeoBiota 69: 51-74. https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.69.73734
Dataset
Supplementary material 1 from: Kobak J, Rachalewski M, Bącela-Spychalska K (2021) What doesn't kill you doesn't make you stronger: Parasites modify interference competition between two invasive amphipods. NeoBiota 69: 51-74. https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.69.73734
Figure S1, Tables S1, S2
Interference competition between wolves and coyotes during variable prey abundance
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Carcass scavenging relaxes chemical-driven female interference competition in flour beetles
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Data from: A shift from exploitation to interference competition with increasing density affects population and community dynamics
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Data from: Interference versus exploitative competition in the regulation of size-structured populations
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Data from: Intensive aquaculture selects for increased virulence and interference competition in bacteria
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Data from: Balancing selection for aflatoxin in Aspergillus flavus is maintained through interference competition with, and fungivory by insects
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Seasonal variation in the strength of interference competition among headwater stream predators
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.