Size matters: body size determines functional responses of ground beetle interactions

Understanding patterns in predator:prey systems and the mechanisms that underlie trophic interactions provides a basis for predicting community structure and the delivery of natural pest control services. The functional response of predators to prey density is a fundamental measure of interaction strength and its characterisation is essential to understanding these processes. We used mesocosm experiments to quantify the functional responses of five ground beetle species that represent common generalist predators of north-west European arable agriculture. We investigated two mechanisms predicted to be key drivers of trophic interactions in natural communities: predator:prey body size ratio and multiple predator effects. Our results show regularities in foraging patterns characteristic of similarly sized predators. Ground beetle attack rates increased and handling times decreased as the predator:prey body-mass ratio rose. Multiple predator effects on total prey consumption rates were sensitive to the identity of the interacting species but not prey density. The extent of interspecific interactions may be a result of differences in body mass between competing beetle species. Overall these results add to the growing evidence for the importance of size in determining trophic interactions and suggest that body mass could offer a focus on which to base the management of natural enemy assemblages.

Larger brain size indirectly increases vulnerability to extinction in mammals

Although previous studies have addressed the question of why large brains evolved, we have limited understanding of potential beneficial or detrimental effects of enlarged brain size in the face of current threats. Using novel phylogenetic path analysis, we evaluated how brain size directly and indirectly, via its effects on life-history and ecology, influences vulnerability to extinction across 474 mammalian species. We found that larger brains, controlling for body size, indirectly increase vulnerability to extinction by extending the gestation period, increasing weaning age, and limiting litter sizes. However, we found no evidence of direct, beneficial or detrimental, effects of brain size on vulnerability to extinction, even when we explicitly considered the different types of threats that lead to vulnerability. Order-specific analyses revealed qualitatively similar patterns for Carnivora and Artiodactyla. Interestingly, for Primates, we found that larger brain size was directly (and indirectly) associated with increased vulnerability to extinction. Our results indicate that under current conditions the constraints on life-history imposed by large brains outweigh the potential benefits, undermining the resilience of the studied mammals. Contrary to the selective forces that have favoured increased brain size throughout evolutionary history, at present, larger brains have become a burden for mammals.