Compensatory density dependence in fish populations: importance, controversy, understanding and prognosis
Authored by Kenneth A Rose, Jr James H Cowan, Kirk O Winemiller, Ransom A Myers, Ray Hilborn
Date Published: 2001
DOI: 10.1046/j.1467-2960.2001.00056.x
Sponsors:
Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI)
Platforms:
No platforms listed
Model Documentation:
Other Narrative
Model Code URLs:
Model code not found
Abstract
Density-dependent processes such as growth, survival, reproduction and
movement are compensatory if their rates change in response to variation
in population density (or numbers) such that they result in a slowed
population growth rate at high densities and promote a numerical
increase of the population at low densities. Compensatory density
dependence is important to fisheries management because it operates to
offset the losses of individuals. While the concept of compensation is
straightforward, it remains one of the most controversial issues in
population dynamics. The difficulties arise when going from general
concepts to specific populations. Compensation is usually quantified
using some combination of spawner-recruit analysis, long-term field
monitoring or manipulative studies, and computer modelling. Problems
arise because there are limitations to each of these approaches, and
these limitations generally originate from the high uncertainty
associated with field measurements. We offer a hierarchical approach to
predicting and understanding compensation that ranges from the very
general, using basic life-history theory, to the highly site-specific, using detailed population models. We analyse a spawner-recruit database
to test the predictions about compensation and compensatory reserve that
derive from a three-endpoint life-history framework designed for fish.
We then summarise field examples of density dependence in specific
processes. Selected long-term field monitoring studies, manipulative
studies and computer modelling examples are then highlighted that
illustrate how density-dependent processes led to compensatory responses
at the population level. Some theoretical and empirical advances that
offer hope for progress in the future on the compensation issue are
discussed. We advocate an approach to compensation that involves
process-level understanding of the underlying mechanisms, life-history
theory, careful analysis of field data, and matrix and individual-based
modelling. There will always be debate if the quantification of
compensation does not include some degree of understanding of the
underlying mechanisms.
Tags