Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 470

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Constant Connectance in Community Food Webs

Martinez, Neo D.·1992·The American Naturalist

Abstract

The constant connectance hypothesis states that among community food webs, trophic links increase approximately as the square of the number of functionally distinct or "trophic" species. This hypothesis is corroborated by the following analysis of 175 community food webs (2-93 trophic species), which shows that the exponent of the link-species relationship is approximately two. This scaling contradicts the widely accepted link-species scaling law, which asserts that links increase linearly with the number of species and that the link-species exponent is one. My results combined with related findings regarding food chain lengths indicate that large food webs have many more links and much longer food chains than previously suggested.

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 · 10.1086/285382

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

Metadata

Authors
Martinez, N. D.
Venue
The American Naturalist
Published
1992-06
Volume
139
Issue
6
Pages
1208-1218
ISSN
  • 0003-0147 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5323
OpenAlex
W1970894083
Cited by
470
References
0
FWCI
11.15
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.