View Item 

Show simple item record

Emergent neutrality or hidden niches?
dc.contributor.authorBarabás, Györgyen_US
dc.contributor.authorD’andrea, Rafaelen_US
dc.contributor.authorRael, Rosalynen_US
dc.contributor.authorMeszéna, Gézaen_US
dc.contributor.authorOstling, Annetteen_US
dc.date.accessioned2013-11-01T19:00:53Z
dc.date.available2015-01-05T13:54:44Zen_US
dc.date.issued2013-11en_US
dc.identifier.citationBarabás, György ; D’andrea, Rafael ; Rael, Rosalyn; Meszéna, Géza ; Ostling, Annette (2013). "Emergent neutrality or hidden niches?." Oikos 122(11).en_US
dc.identifier.issn0030-1299en_US
dc.identifier.issn1600-0706en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/100274
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.publisherBlackwell Publishing Ltden_US
dc.titleEmergent neutrality or hidden niches?en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelNatural Resources and Environmenten_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelScienceen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDept of Biological Physics, Eötvös Loránd Univ., Pázmány Péter sétány 1A, HU‐1117, Budapest, Hungary.en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDept of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Univ. of Michigan, 830 North University, Ann Arbor, MI 48109‐1048, USA.en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/100274/1/j.1600-0706.2013.00298.x.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1600-0706.2013.00298.xen_US
dc.identifier.sourceOikosen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMeszéna G. et al. 2006. Competitive exclusion and limiting similarity: a unified theory. Theor. Popul. Biol. 8: 68 – 87.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHubbell S. P. 2001. The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography. – Princeton Univ. Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHubbell S. P. 2006. Neutral theory and the evolution of ecological equivalence. Ecology 87: 1387 – 1398.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLeibold M. A. 1995. The niche concept revisited: mechanistic models and community context. Ecology 76: 1371 – 1382.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLevine J. M. and HilleRisLambers J. 2009. The importance of niches for the maintenance of species diversity. Nature 461: 254 – 258.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMacArthur R. H. 1960. On the relative abundance of species. Am. Nat. 8: 25 – 36.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMacArthur R. H. 1970. Species packing and competitive equilibria for many species. Theor. Popul. Biol. 8: 1 – 11.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcGill B. J. 2003. Strong and weak tests of macroecological theory. Oikos 102: 679 – 685.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcGill B. J. et al. 2007. Species abundance distributions: moving beyond single prediction theories to integration within an ecological framework. Ecol. Lett. 8: 995 – 1015.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMeszéna G. 2005. Adaptive dynamics: the continuity argument. J. Evol. Biol. 8: 1182 – 1185.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNee S. and Colegrave N. 2006. Ecology: paradox of the clumps. Nature 441: 417 – 418.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNovotny V. et al. 2002. Low host specificity of herbivorous insects in a tropical forest. Nature 416: 841 – 844.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePigolotti S. et al. 2010. How Gaussian competition leads to lumpy or uniform species distribution. Theor. Ecol. 8: 89 – 96.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceScheffer M. and van Nes E. 2006. Self‐organized similarity, the evolutionary emergence of groups of similar species. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103: 6230 – 6235.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSegura A. M. et al. 2011. Emergent neutrality drives phytoplankton species coexistence. Proc. R. Soc. B 278: 2355 – 2361.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSugihara G. 1989. How do species divide resources? Am. Nat. 8: 458 – 463.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTilman D. 2004. Niche tradeoffs, neutrality, and community structure: a stochastic theory of resource competition, invasion, and community assembly. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 7: 661 – 668.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVergnon R. et al. 2012. Emergent neutrality leads to multimodal species abundance distributions. Nat. Commun. 8: 663.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVolkov I. et al. 2003. Neutral theory and relative species abundance in ecology. Nature 424: 1035 – 1037.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceYan B. et al. 2012. Trait assembly of woody plants in communities across sub‐alpine gradients: identifying the role of limiting similarity. J. Veg. Sci. 8: 698 – 708.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAbrams P. A. 1975. Limiting similarity and the form of the competition coefficient. Theor. Popul. Biol. 8: 356 – 375.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAdler F. R. and Mosquera J. 2000. Is space necessary? Interference competition and limits to biodiversity. Ecology 81: 3226 – 3232.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAdler P. B. et al. 2007. A niche for neutrality. Ecol. Lett. 8: 95 – 104.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAmarasekare P. 2003. Competitive coexistence in spatially structured environments: a synthesis. Ecol. Lett. 8: 1109 – 1122.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBarabás G. et al. 2012. Continuous coexistence or discrete species? A new review of an old question. Evol. Ecol. Res. 8: 523 – 554.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBarabás G. et al. 2013. Species packing in nonsmooth competition models. Theor. Ecol. 8: 1 – 19.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBonsall M. B. et al. 2004. Life history tradeoffs assemble ecological guilds. Science 306: 111 – 114.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChase J. M. and Leibold M. A. 2003. Ecological niches: linking classical and contemporary approaches. – Univ. Chicago Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChave J. et al. 2002. Comparing classical community models: theoretical consequences for patterns of diversity. Am. Nat. 8: 1 – 23.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChesson P. 1991. A need for niches? – Trends Ecol. Evol. 8: 26 – 28.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChesson P. 2000. Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 8: 343 – 366.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChesson P. et al. 2001. Environmental niches and ecosystem functioning. – In: Kinzig A. et al. (eds), The functional consequences of biodiversity. Princeton Univ. Press, pp. 213 – 245.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChisholm R. A. and Lichstein J. W. 2009. Linking dispersal, immigration and scale in the neutral theory of biodiversity. Ecol. Lett. 8: 1385 – 1393.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDornelas M. and Connolly S. R. 2008. Multiple modes in a coral species abundance distribution. Ecol. Lett. 8: 1008 – 1016.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEtienne R. S. et al. 2007. The zero‐sum assumption in neutral biodiversity theory. J. Theor. Biol. 8: 522 – 536.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGravel D. et al. 2006. Reconciling niche and neutrality: the continuum hypothesis. Ecol. Lett. 8: 399 – 409.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGyllenberg M. and Meszéna G. 2005. On the impossibility of the coexistence of infinitely many strategies. J. Math. Biol. 8: 133 – 160.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHaegeman B. and Loreau M. 2011. A mathematical synthesis of niche and neutral theories in community ecology. J. Theor. Biol. 8: 150 – 165.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHérault B. 2007. Reconciling niche and neutrality through the emergent group approach. Persp. Plant Ecol. 8: 71 – 78.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHernandez‐Garcia E. et al. 2009. Species competition: coexistence, exclusion and clustering. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 367: 3183 – 3195.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHolt R. D. 2006. Emergent neutrality. Trends Ecol. Evol. 8: 531 – 533.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
j.1600-0706.2013.00298.x.pdf
Size:
862.3KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.