Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 514

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Dynamics of Tropical Communities: D.M. Newbery, H.H.T. Prins & N. Brown (Eds) (1998)

Open access
Newton, Adrian·1999·Journal of Applied Ecology

Abstract

Pp. ix + 635. Blackwell Science Ltd, Oxford. £60.00 (hardback), ISBN 0-632-04944-8. After something of a delay, here are the proceedings of the 37th Symposium of the BES held in Cambridge (UK) in 1996. The result, at over 600 pages and 22 chapters, is a book thick enough to stun an ox. Never mind the width, though, what about the quality? This is a solid text, in every sense. The book provides a useful insight into what is currently engaging tropical researchers, and it is obvious on the basis of these contributions that a great deal of interesting research has been undertaken over the past decade. There is no doubt that this book will be consulted widely; at the very least it provides a valuable access point into recent literature and will therefore be particularly appreciated by students. As a statement of current research into tropical communities, however, it raised a few doubts in my mind. Firstly, this book is mostly about trees. Half of the chapters deal specifically with the regeneration ecology of rain forest trees, and the factors influencing establishment. As a result, the other contributions appear to be rather token efforts – there are single chapters on amphibians, birds, butterflies, primates, a couple on fish, and a couple on grazing mammals. What about fungi, bacteria, or beetles, where most of tropical diversity resides? Rain forests also receive much more emphasis than other tropical communities; why so little on dry forests, deserts, coral reefs or marine communities? Why nothing on molecular ecology, which is revolutionizing our understanding of ecological processes, and why so little on the palaeoecological research which has provided such valuable insights into long-term dynamics? The editors have to share the blame for these imbalances. The sequencing of chapters is also rather haphazard and I would like to have seen greater editorial efforts at integrating the different contributions and in highlighting the parallels between them, perhaps in the form of a summary chapter. The focus of the book and the logic of its structure are certainly elusive as it stands. My second doubt relates to the questions that the research addresses. The main conclusion of all this research – to summarize brutally – is that tropical systems are more dynamic than people used to think. This is in itself an important finding, but much of the work is placed in the context of understanding patterns of diversity and the basis of species coexistence. Why is there so much emphasis on niche differentiation in tropical trees? It is disappointing to see such a lot of effort devoted to a question which is over 50 years old, arguably intractable, and uses concepts (such as niche) that cannot be adequately defined or operationalized (see Peters 1991). According to the criteria described by Peters 1991, much of the research described here is scientifically weak, with little explicit hypothesis-testing and little mention of theory; arguably more akin to natural history than ecological science. Many of the theories that are mentioned, such as the Janzen–Connell hypothesis, seem to have been around for a long time. The ghost of P. W. Richards seems to pervade this book – his classic but largely descriptive text (Richards 1952) is cited by a third of the authors. Does this suggest a need for new questions about tropical communities, and the development of new theories? Finally, there is very little here about the impact of people on the dynamics of tropical communities. Although there are valuable chapters on exploitation of wildebeest and impacts of small-scale fishing on reefs, there is almost nothing on the impacts of deforestation and forest degradation. This produces a rather surreal effect, rather like attending a fiddle concert in Rome while the ‘recreational pyromaniacs’ (my favourite phrase of this book) go to work. Surely, while tropical forests continue to be cleared and degraded at unprecedented rates, we need to understand how these communities will respond to this disturbance? Is the development of tools for predicting the impacts of such disturbance not at the very core of what ecological science has to offer, towards solution of this global catastrophe? Without addressing these issues this book appears to me to be seriously flawed, and in marked contrast to an earlier symposium volume on a related theme (Sutton et al. 1983).

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 · 10.1046/j.1365-2664.1999.04464.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 514

Metadata

Authors
Newton, A.
Venue
Journal of Applied Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1999-10
Volume
36
Issue
5
Pages
844-845
ISSN
  • 0021-8901 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2664
OpenAlex
W1483890490
Cited by
514
References
0
FWCI
24.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Dynamics of Tropical Communities: D.M. Newbery, H.H.T. Prins & N. Brown (Eds) (1998). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2664.1999.04464.x
The paper
Newton, A. (1999). Dynamics of Tropical Communities: D.M. Newbery, H.H.T. Prins & N. Brown (Eds) (1998). Journal of Applied Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2664.1999.04464.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.