The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Neutrality, niches, and dispersal in a temperate forest understory
Open accessAbstract
A fundamental goal of ecology is to understand what controls the distribution and abundance of species. Both environmental niches and trade-offs among species in dispersal and competitive ability have traditionally been cited as determinants of plant community composition. More recently, neutral models have shown that communities of species with identical life-history characteristics and no adaptation to environmental niches can form spatial distribution patterns similar to those found in nature, so long as the species have a limited dispersal distance. If there is a strong correlation between geographic distance and change in environmental conditions, however, such spatial patterns can arise through either neutral or niche-based processes. To test these competing theories, we developed a sampling design that decoupled distance and environment in the understory plant communities of an old-growth, temperate forest. We found strong evidence of niche-structuring but almost no support for neutral predictions. Dispersal limitation acted in conjunction with environmental gradients to determine species' distributions, and both functional and phylogenetic constraints appear to contribute to the niche differentiation that structures community assembly. Our results indicate that testing a neutral hypothesis without accounting for environmental gradients will at best cause unexplained variation in plant distributions and may well provide misleading support for neutrality because of a correlation between geographic distance and environment.
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
Stochastic Community Assembly: Does It Matter in Microbial Ecology?
Zhou, J., & Ning, D. (2017) · Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews · doi:10.1128/mmbr.00002-17 · Cited by 2,773
Habitat suitability modelling and niche theory
Hirzel, A. H., & Le Lay, G. (2008) · Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01524.x · Cited by 873
Biodiversity-ecosystem function research: Is it relevant to conservation?
Srivastava, D. S., & Vellend, M. (2005) · Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.36.102003.152636 · Cited by 712
Garnier, E., & Navas, M.-L. (2012) · Agronomy for Sustainable Development · doi:10.1007/s13593-011-0036-y · Cited by 490
Myers, J. A., Chase, J. M., Jiménez, I., Jørgensen, P. M., Araujo‐Murakami, A., Paniagua‐Zambrana, N., & Seidel, R. (2013) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/ele.12021 · Cited by 470
Metadata
- Authors
- Gilbert, B., & Lechowicz, M. J.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2004-05-05
- Volume
- 101
- Issue
- 20
- Pages
- 7651-7656
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W2006460052
- Cited by
- 530
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 13.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Neutrality, niches, and dispersal in a temperate forest understory. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.0400814101
- The paper
- Gilbert, B., & Lechowicz, M. J. (2004). Neutrality, niches, and dispersal in a temperate forest understory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0400814101
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.