Data from: Evaluation of alternative prey-, predator-, and ratio-dependent functional response models in a zooplankton microcosm

There is strenuous debate among ecologists regarding the inclusion of predator density into the originally prey- dependent functional response. We provided comprehensive empirical comparisons of alternative functional response models for the predatory ostracod <i>Heterocypris incongruens</i> (Ramdohr, 1808) and the rotifer <i>Brachionus calyciflorus</i> (Pallas, 1766) as its prey in small freshwater microcosms. Prey killed was measured at factorial combinations of four predator densities and five prey densities, and was recorded at 3 min intervals over 60 min experiments. To support the potential effect of predator interference on per capita kill rate, we recorded ostracod activity and aggression. Kill rate increased following a saturating function with increasing prey density and decreased with increasing predator density. Model evaluation using an information–theoretic approach indicated that the Arditi–Ginzburg type II ratio-dependent model performed best, followed by the Arditi–Akcakaya and Beddington–DeAngelis type II predator-dependent models, suggesting that predator interference was important in predicting kill rates. Interference among predators increased and their activity decreased with increasing predator density, providing confirmation that interference was responsible for the predator-dependent effect. By combining a microcosm experiment and behavioral observations, our results suggest that predator interference at realistic population densities influences ostracod kill rates and this form of interference was best accommodated by predator-dependent models.<br><br>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<br>The ‘well’ is the arena in which the predator-prey microcosm experiments we conducted. The total volume of water held in the well (well_vol) was 2.75 ml.Date: Date the trial was completedWell ID: Row and Column of Plate<br>The dates and wells could be combined to create a unique trial ID in most cases.<br>P.well: Number of ostracods per wellP: Ostracod density, individuals/mlN.well: Number of rotifers per wellN: Rotifer density, individuals/mlkilled: Number of Rotifers killed during observation<br>I would count the number of rotifers consistently throughout the hour trial period. The interval between counting was about 3 mins. Thus, there is a minimum time that this depletion could have occurred (min.time) or a maximum time (max.time) based on the time since I last checked the well (multiple wells during an hour had predator and prey combinations, so I was checking a multiple in a given hour). When the time seems high that does not mean that the wells were not checked, it means that depletion didn’t occur until that interval. An average time was used for the paper, to calculate the kill per min, per predator.<br>