Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 573

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparing Classical Community Models: Theoretical Consequences for Patterns of Diversity

Chave, Jérôme, Muller‐Landau, Helene C., Levin, Simon A.·2002·The American Naturalist

Abstract

Abstract: Mechanisms proposed to explain the maintenance of species diversity within ecological communities of sessile organisms include niche differentiation mediated by competitive trade-offs, frequency dependence resulting from species-specific pests, recruitment limitation due to local dispersal, and a speciation-extinction dynamic equilibrium mediated by stochasticity (drift). While each of these processes, and more, have been shown to act in particular communities, much remains to be learned about their relative importance in shaping community-level patterns. We used a spatially-explicit, individual-based model to assess the effects of each of these processes on species richness, relative abundance, and spatial patterns such as the species-area curve. Our model communities had an order-of-magnitude more individuals than any previous such study, and we also developed a finite-size scaling analysis to infer the large-scale properties of these systems in order to establish the generality of our conclusions across system sizes. As expected, each mechanism can promote diversity. We found some qualitative differences in community patterns across communities in which different combinations of these mechanisms operate. Species-area curves follow a power law with short-range dispersal and a logarithmic law with global dispersal. Relative-abundance distributions are more even for systems with competitive differences and trade-offs than for those in which all species are competitively equivalent, and they are most even when frequency dependence (even if weak) is present. Overall, however, communities in which different processes operated showed surprisingly similar patterns, which suggests that the form of community-level patterns cannot in general be used to distinguish among mechanisms maintaining diversity there. Nevertheless, parameterization of models such as these from field data on the strengths of the different mechanisms could yield insight into their relative roles in diversity maintenance in any given community.

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 · 10.1086/324112

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 573

Metadata

Authors
Chave, J., Muller‐Landau, H. C., & Levin, S. A.
Venue
The American Naturalist
Published
2002-01
Volume
159
Issue
1
Pages
1-23
ISSN
  • 0003-0147 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5323
OpenAlex
W2134126987
Cited by
573
References
2
FWCI
24.30
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: Comparing Classical Community Models: Theoretical Consequences for Patterns of Diversity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/324112
The paper
Chave, J., Muller‐Landau, H. C., & Levin, S. A. (2002). Comparing Classical Community Models: Theoretical Consequences for Patterns of Diversity. The American Naturalist. https://doi.org/10.1086/324112

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.