The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Maintenance of Species Diversity by Disturbance
Abstract
Hypotheses that relate disturbance to the production and maintenance of species diversity are reviewed. The hypotheses have been classified traditionally by the effect of the disturbance on the community: Those that involve selective mortality, which maintains the species diversity of a community in equilibrium, and those that invoke causing random, localized, mass mortality, which prevent the community from reaching and equilibrium. Regardless of this difference, most hypotheses predict that the greatest number of species will occur at intermediate leves of disturbance. We develop graphical models for equilibrium and nonequilibrium situations, which we show to differ only in respect to temporal and spatial scale. We maintain that the usual outcome-the greatest number of species at intermediate levels of disturbance-can be explained by assuming that there are trade-offs in species-specific abilities that place constraints on immigration to, and extinction in, patches. Changes in immigration and extinction, the process that govern patch diversity, depend on species-specific abilities to fend off competitors or to endure disturbances. Members of a species can resist competitors or resist disturbance, but they cannot excel at both. If this trade-off does not exist, then the highest level of species diversity will not occur at intermediate levels of disturbance. Furthermore, we show that if this assumption is relaxed or if interactions between the frequency and magnitude of disturbances are considered, other unexpected outcomes are posible.
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
A General Hypothesis of Species Diversity
Huston, M. (1979) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/283366 · Cited by 3,390
Parzen, E. (1999) · doi:10.1137/1.9781611971125 · Cited by 1,389
Cited by
Clergeau, P., Savard, J.-P. L., Mennechez, G., & Falardeau, G. (1998) · The Condor · doi:10.2307/1369707 · Cited by 544
The ecology of mixed severity fire regimes in Washington, Oregon, and northern California
Perry, D. A., Hessburg, P. F., Skinner, C. N., Spies, T. A., Stephens, S. L., Taylor, A. H., Franklin, J. F., McComb, B., & Riegel, G. (2011) · Forest Ecology and Management · doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2011.05.004 · Cited by 306
Co‐Occurring Tree Species Change Rank in Seedling Performance with Resources Varied Experimentally
Latham, R. E. (1992) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1941461 · Cited by 190
Self-citationCOMMUNITY ASSEMBLY IN THE PRESENCE OF DISTURBANCE: A MICROCOSM EXPERIMENT
Jiang, L., & Patel, S. N. (2008) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/07-1263.1 · Cited by 131
Effects of Productivity and Disturbance on Species Richness: A Neutral Model
Kadmon, R., & Benjamini, Y. (2006) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/504602 · Cited by 83
Metadata
- Authors
- Petraitis, P. S., Latham, R. E., & Niesenbaum, R. A.
- Venue
- The Quarterly Review of Biology
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 1989-12
- Volume
- 64
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 393-418
- ISSN
- 0033-5770 (ISSN-L)
- 1539-7718
- OpenAlex
- W2099254338
- Cited by
- 670
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 13.52
- 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: The Maintenance of Species Diversity by Disturbance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/416457
- The paper
- Petraitis, P. S., Latham, R. E., & Niesenbaum, R. A. (1989). The Maintenance of Species Diversity by Disturbance. The Quarterly Review of Biology. https://doi.org/10.1086/416457
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.