Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 893

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 119 of the 119 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Community Assembly, Niche Conservatism, and Adaptive Evolution in Changing Environments

Ackerly, David D.·2003·International Journal of Plant Sciences
DOI 10.1086/368401
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The widespread correspondence between phenotypic variation and environmental conditions, the "fit" of organisms to their environment, reflects the adaptive value of plant functional traits. Several processes contribute to these patterns: plasticity, ecological sorting, and adaptive evolution. This article addresses the importance of ecological sorting processes (community assembly, migration, habitat tracking, etc.) as primary causes of functional trait distributions at the local and landscape level. In relatively saturated communities, plants will establish and regenerate in environments to which they are well adapted, so their distributions, and the distributions of associated functional traits, will reflect the distribution of optimal or near‐optimal environmental conditions in space and time. The predicted evolutionary corollary of this process is that traits related to habitat occupancy, e.g., environmental tolerances, will be under stabilizing selection. This process contributes to the widely observed pattern of phylogenetic niche conservatism, i.e., ecological and phenotypic similarities of closely related species. Evidence for niche conservatism in plants is reviewed. Based on Jackson and Overpeck's concept of the realized environment, I propose three scenarios in which a species' distributional responses to environmental conditions will lead to a "mismatch" between its environmental tolerances and the environments it occupies, thus creating opportunities for adaptive evolution: (1) the colonization of "environmental islands" (habitats that are discontinuous in niche space) that require large adaptive shifts in tolerance of one or more environmental factors; (2) the persistence of "trailing‐edge" populations in species tracking changing climate, if barriers to dispersal of competitors prevent competitive exclusion in the deteriorating conditions; and (3) responses to changes in the realized environment in multidimensional niche space, in which species are predicted to track environmental factors for which they exhibit narrow tolerances and exhibit adaptive evolutionary response along axes where they exhibit greater niche breadth. These three scenarios provide a conceptual framework that emphasizes the role of ecological sorting processes and stabilizing selection as the context for understanding opportunities for adaptive evolution in heterogeneous and changing environments.

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 · 10.1086/368401

Cites

119 of 119 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

Cited by

See all 893

Metadata

Authors
Ackerly, D. D.
Venue
International Journal of Plant Sciences
Publisher
University of Chicago Press
Published
2003-05
Volume
164
Issue
S3
Pages
S165-S184
ISSN
  • 1058-5893 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5315
DOI
10.1086/368401
OpenAlex
W2015340512
Cited by
893
References
119
FWCI
12.91
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.