Cited by 304Primate Behavior and EcologyWildlife Ecology and ConservationEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies

Density compensation in neotropical primate communities: evidence from 56 hunted and nonhunted Amazonian forests of varying productivity

Peres, C. A., Dolman, P. M.·2000·Oecologia

Abstract

Density compensation is a community-level phenomenon in which increases in the abundance of some species may offset the population decline, extirpation, or absence of other potentially interacting competitors. In this paper we examine the evidence for density compensation in neotropical primate assemblages using data from 56 hunted and nonhunted, but otherwise undisturbed, forest sites of Amazonia and the Guianan shields from which population density estimates are available for all diurnal primate species. We found good evidence of density compensation of the residual assemblage of nonhunted mid-sized species where the large-bodied (ateline) species had been severely reduced in numbers or driven to local extinction by subsistence hunters. Only weak evidence for density compensation, however, was detected in small-bodied species. These conclusions are based on the effects of ordinal measures of hunting pressure on the aggregate primate biomass across different size classes after controlling for the effects of forest type and productivity. These results are interpreted primarily in relation to patterns of niche partitioning between different primate functional groups or ecospecies. This study suggests that while overhunting drastically reduces the average body size in multi-species assemblages of forest vertebrates, depletion of large-bodied species is only partially offset (i.e. undercompensated) by smaller taxa.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/pl00008845

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The patterns are highly suggestive of density compensation processes where the abundance of resilient species rises if their more vulnerable competitors for resources are removed.

    “This is highly suggestive of density compensation (Peres and Dolman 2000) processes where the abundance of resilient species rises if their more vulnerable competitors for resources (space, food, etc.) are removed.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Peres, C. A., & Dolman, P. M.
Affiliations
University of East Anglia (GB)
Venue
Oecologia
Published
2000-02-01
Volume
122
Issue
2
Pages
175-189
ISSN
0029-8549 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2025300608
Cited by
304
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 63 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 15
FWCI
3.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Oecologia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Wildlife Conservation Society
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Keywords
density compensation, Neotropical primates, hunting pressure, subsistence hunting, body size, resource partitioning, forest productivity, Amazon rainforest

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review