The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Meta-Analysis of Competition in Field Experiments
Abstract
A meta-analysis was conducted on field-competition experiments published in six journals over a 10-yr period. We analyzed the effects of competition on the biomass of organisms belonging to 93 species in a wide variety of habitats. Competition had a large effect overall, with a great deal of heterogeneity in that effect among organisms. There were large differences among trophic levels in competitive effects, but the relative magnitude of competition at different trophic levels was contrary to the predictions of ecological theory. Primary producers and carnivores displayed small to medium effects. In these two groups, interspecific effects did not differ from intraspecific effects, nor did effects differ in terrestrial versus aquatic habitats. The effects of competition on herbivores ranged from large effects on anurans and lotic arthropods, to medium effects on marine mollusks and echinoderms, to effects that were not statistically distinguishable from zero for terrestrial arthropods. Interspecific competitive effects among these herbivore groups were generally less than intraspecific effects. Among primary producers, the effects of competition were not different in high- and low-productivity habitats. Across all taxa, large organisms did not experience greater competitive effects than small organisms, and competitive effects did not depend on the size attained in the absence of competitors. The effects of competition were weakly density-dependent in cases in which it was possible to examine the effects of the density of neighbors. Experiments conducted on caged organisms resulted in greater competitive effects than those with free-roaming and unenclosed organisms. Experiments with small sample sizes, short durations, and poor experimental design were more variable than experiments that were larger, longer, and better planned.
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
Phylogenies and the Comparative Method
Felsenstein, J. (1985) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/284325 · Cited by 9,793
Pseudoreplication and the Design of Ecological Field Experiments
Hurlbert, S. H. (1984) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.2307/1942661 · Cited by 8,377
Grime, J. P. (1977) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/283244 · Cited by 5,754
Primary, Secondary, and Meta-Analysis of Research
GLASS, G. V. (1976) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x005010003 · Cited by 4,890
Perturbation Experiments in Community Ecology: Theory and Practice
Bender, E. A., Case, T. J., & Gilpin, M. E. (1984) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1939452 · Cited by 1,245
Cited by
The meta-analysis of response ratios in experimental ecology
Hedges, L. V., Gurevitch, J., & Curtis, P. S. (1999) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(1999)080[1150:tmaorr]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 4,704
Self-citationTews, J., Brose, U., Grimm, V., Tielbörger, K., Wichmann, M. C., Schwager, M., & Jeltsch, F. (2004) · Journal of Biogeography · doi:10.1046/j.0305-0270.2003.00994.x · Cited by 2,575
A leaf-height-seed (LHS) plant ecology strategy scheme
Westoby, M. (1998) · Plant and Soil · doi:10.1023/a:1004327224729 · Cited by 1,925
Meta-analysis and the science of research synthesis
Gurevitch, J., Koricheva, J., Nakagawa, S., & Stewart, G. (2018) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature25753 · Cited by 1,709
Self-citationThe effects of organic agriculture on biodiversity and abundance: a meta‐analysis
BENGTSSON, J., AHNSTRÖM, J., & WEIBULL, A. (2005) · Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2005.01005.x · Cited by 1,751
Metadata
- Authors
- Gurevitch, J., Morrow, L. L., Wallace, A., & Walsh, J. S.
- Venue
- The American Naturalist
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 1992-10
- Volume
- 140
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 539-572
- ISSN
- 0003-0147 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5323
- OpenAlex
- W2035925266
- Cited by
- 865
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 3.32
- 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: A Meta-Analysis of Competition in Field Experiments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/285428
- The paper
- Gurevitch, J., Morrow, L. L., Wallace, A., & Walsh, J. S. (1992). A Meta-Analysis of Competition in Field Experiments. The American Naturalist. https://doi.org/10.1086/285428
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.