The DOI matches its Crossref record.
On the Notion of Favorableness in Plant Ecology
Abstract
For many years plant ecologists have espoused the notion that habitats differ in an intrinsic quality that has been called favorableness. Here I point out that the concept of favorableness is circular and counterproductive. I develop the thesis that species diversity is determined by the balance of several dynamic processes: speciation, competition, immigration, adaptation, and extinction. A simple kinetic model places each of these processes in a definite perspective. My arguments are based on the observation that widespread mesic environments commonly support vegetation containing greater species diversity than environments of more unusual character such as sand dunes, inundated depressions, bogs, mountain tops, saline soils, etc. Habitats such as these, that incorporate uncommon features and are often patchy and of small total area, are called peripheral habitats. Empirical and theoretical considerations both lead to the opinion that the pressure of competition in the species-rich communities of mesic habitats impels an adaptive outflow of species down gradient toward relatively impoverished peripheral habitats. Evolutionary difficulties involved in adapting up a competition gradient argue that the species flow from core to peripheral habitats is virtually unidirectional. Application of the kinetic model to some elementary features of the earth's geography provides a quantitative result that predicts a large and universal tropical-temperate diversity gradient. The mechanism is founded on an area-dependent model of speciation coupled to the estimated rate of environmental change with latitude. It requires no assumptions about stability, food webs, or niche packing. The last section addresses the problem of how the dimensions of plant niche space could vary between different vegetation formations and briefly discusses components of rainforest diversity.
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
Erosion of Lizard Diversity by Climate Change and Altered Thermal Niches
Sinervo, B., Méndez-de-la-Cruz, F., Miles, D. B., Heulin, B., Bastiaans, E., Villagrán-Santa Cruz, M., Lara-Resendiz, R., Martínez-Méndez, N., Calderón-Espinosa, M. L., Meza-Lázaro, R. N., et al. (2010) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1184695 · Cited by 1,902
A kinetic model of Phanerozoic taxonomic diversity I. Analysis of marine orders
Sepkoski, J. J. (1978) · Paleobiology · doi:10.1017/s0094837300005972 · Cited by 548
Taylor, D. R., Aarssen, L. W., & Loehle, C. (1990) · Oikos · doi:10.2307/3545432 · Cited by 470
THE INFLUENCE OF PRODUCTIVITY ON THE SPECIES RICHNESS OF PLANTS: A CRITICAL ASSESSMENT
Gillman, L. N., & Wright, S. D. (2006) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2006)87[1234:tiopot]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 305
The tropics as a source of evolutionary novelty through geological time
Jablonski, D. (1993) · Nature · doi:10.1038/364142a0 · Cited by 255
Metadata
- Authors
- Terborgh, J.
- Venue
- The American Naturalist
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 1973-07
- Volume
- 107
- Issue
- 956
- Pages
- 481-501
- ISSN
- 0003-0147 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5323
- OpenAlex
- W2045119578
- Cited by
- 376
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.66
- 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: On the Notion of Favorableness in Plant Ecology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/282852
- The paper
- Terborgh, J. (1973). On the Notion of Favorableness in Plant Ecology. The American Naturalist. https://doi.org/10.1086/282852
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.