The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
On the relationship between niche and distribution
Abstract
Applications of Hutchinson’s n‐dimensional niche concept are often focused on the role of interspecific competition in shaping species distribution patterns. In this paper, I discuss a variety of factors, in addition to competition, that influence the observed relationship between species distribution and the availability of suitable habitat. In particular, I show that Hutchinson’s niche concept can be modified to incorporate the influences of niche width, habitat availability and dispersal, as well as interspecific competition per se. I introduce a simulation model called NICHE that embodies many of Hutchinson’s original niche concepts and use this model to predict patterns of species distribution. The model may help to clarify how dispersal, niche size and competition interact, and under what conditions species might be common in unsuitable habitat or absent from suitable habitat. A brief review of the pertinent literature suggests that species are often absent from suitable habitat and present in unsuitable habitat, in ways predicted by theory. However, most tests of niche theory are hampered by inadequate consideration of what does and does not constitute suitable habitat. More conclusive evidence for these predictions will require rigorous determination of habitat suitability under field conditions. I suggest that to do this, ecologists must measure habitat specific demography and quantify how demographic parameters vary in response to temporal and spatial variation in measurable niche dimensions.
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
Cites
Hutchinson, G. E. (1957) · Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology · doi:10.1101/sqb.1957.022.01.039 · Cited by 6,228
Regional Forest Fragmentation and the Nesting Success of Migratory Birds
Robinson, S. K., Thompson, F. R., Donovan, T. M., Whitehead, D. R., & Faaborg, J. (1995) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.267.5206.1987 · Cited by 1,442
Cited by
Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions
Phillips, S. J., Anderson, R. P., & Schapire, R. E. (2006) · Ecological Modelling · doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2005.03.026 · Cited by 15,396
AUC: A misleading measure of the performance of predictive distribution models
Lobo, J. M., Jiménez‐Valverde, A., & Real, R. (2008) · Global Ecology and Biogeography · doi:10.1111/j.1466-8238.2007.00358.x · Cited by 3,499
Wisz, M. S., Pottier, J., Kissling, W. D., Pellissier, L., Lenoir, J., Damgaard, C. F., Dormann, C. F., Forchhammer, M. C., Grytnes, J., Guisan, A., et al. (2013) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1469-185x.2012.00235.x · Cited by 1,769
Hutchinson's duality: The once and future niche
Colwell, R. K., & Rangel, T. F. (2009) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0901650106 · Cited by 769
The uncertain nature of absences and their importance in species distribution modelling
Lobo, J. M., Jiménez‐Valverde, A., & Hortal, J. (2010) · Ecography · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0587.2009.06039.x · Cited by 656
Metadata
- Authors
- Pulliam, H. R.
- Venue
- Ecology Letters
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2000-07
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 349-361
- ISSN
- 1461-023X (ISSN-L)
- 1461-0248
- OpenAlex
- W2147531279
- Cited by
- 1,557
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 12.28
- 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
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.