The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Resource heterogeneity and ungulate population dynamics
Abstract
It has been suggested that climatic variation has the effect on the dynamics of arid and semi‐arid grazing systems of reducing animal numbers below the level at which they have much impact on vegetation or soils, and that spatial heterogeneity in resource availability serves to buffer herbivores against climatic variation. Modelling was used to test these hypotheses and to examine the interacting effects of temporal and spatial variability in plant production on animal population dynamics and defoliation intensity. The model distinguishes areas of the range that are accessible during wet and dry seasons, and examines the effect of seasonal restrictions in foraging area. It was established that the animal population is in long‐term equilibrium with dry‐season resources, on which it depends for survival; that dry season resource areas and outlying areas thus operate in a source‐sink manner; and that the ratio of these areas determines the strength of consumer‐resource coupling outside the dry‐season range. A high ratio of dry season to wet season resources may support a sufficiently large animal population to impose non‐trivial defoliation impacts on the outlying range. Increasing degrees of variability in primary production on areas used by animals for surviving the dry season increased the annual variation in animal abundance and reduced the mean. By comparison with a stable environment, for which the model predicts virtually stable animal numbers and constant, low defoliation intensity, variation in annual rainfall causes wide fluctuations in animal numbers and defoliation intensity. Under climatic variation, animal numbers can build up enough to impose much higher defoliation intensities than under a constant regime. Periodic intense defoliation is a consequence of climatic variability which is likely to make these environments more, not less, prone to ecological change.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Herrero, M., Havlík, P., Valin, H., Notenbaert, A., Rufino, M. C., Thornton, P. K., Blümmel, M., Weiss, F., Grace, D., & Obersteiner, M. (2013) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1308149110 · Cited by 1,254
Chamaillé‐Jammes, S., Fritz, H., Valeix, M., Murindagomo, F., & Clobert, J. (2008) · Journal of Animal Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2656.2007.01307.x · Cited by 596
Carrying capacity, migration, and dispersal in Yellowstone bison.
Plumb, G. E., White, P. J., Coughenour, M. B., & Wallen, R. L. (2009) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2009.05.019 · Cited by 115
Functional conservation areas and the future of Africa’s wildlife
Fynn, R. W. S., & Bonyongo, M. C. (2011) · African Journal of Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2028.2010.01245.x · Cited by 114
Bernes, C., Bråthen, K. A., Forbes, B. C., Speed, J. D., & Moen, J. (2015) · Environmental Evidence · doi:10.1186/s13750-014-0030-3 · Cited by 103
Metadata
- Authors
- Illius, A. W., & O'Connor, T. G.
- Venue
- Oikos
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2000-05
- Volume
- 89
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 283-294
- ISSN
- 0030-1299 (ISSN-L)
- 1600-0706
- OpenAlex
- W2149765762
- Cited by
- 333
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 18.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Resource heterogeneity and ungulate population dynamics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1034/j.1600-0706.2000.890209.x
- The paper
- Illius, A. W., & O'Connor, T. G. (2000). Resource heterogeneity and ungulate population dynamics. Oikos. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0706.2000.890209.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.