Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 333

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Resource heterogeneity and ungulate population dynamics

Illius, A. W., O'Connor, T. G.·2000·Oikos

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1034/j.1600-0706.2000.890209.x

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

See all 333

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.