Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 181

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

Experimental evaluation of evolution and coevolution as agents of ecosystem change in Trinidadian streams

Open access
Palkovacs, Eric P., Marshall, Michael C., Lamphere, Brad A., Lynch, Benjamin R., Weese, Dylan J., Fraser, Douglas F., Reznick, David N., Pringle, Catherine M., Kinnison, Michael T.·2009·Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Abstract

Evolution has been shown to be a critical determinant of ecological processes in some systems, but its importance relative to traditional ecological effects is not well known. In addition, almost nothing is known about the role of coevolution in shaping ecosystem function. Here, we experimentally evaluated the relative effects of species invasion (a traditional ecological effect), evolution and coevolution on ecosystem processes in Trinidadian streams. We manipulated the presence and population-of-origin of two common fish species, the guppy (Poecilia reticulata) and the killifish (Rivulus hartii). We measured epilithic algal biomass and accrual, aquatic invertebrate biomass, and detrital decomposition. Our results show that, for some ecosystem responses, the effects of evolution and coevolution were larger than the effects of species invasion. Guppy evolution in response to alternative predation regimes significantly influenced algal biomass and accrual rates. Guppies from a high-predation site caused an increase in algae relative to guppies from a low-predation site; algae effects were probably shaped by observed divergence in rates of nutrient excretion and algae consumption.Rivulus–guppy coevolution significantly influenced the biomass of aquatic invertebrates. Locally coevolved populations reduced invertebrate biomass relative to non-coevolved populations. These results challenge the general assumption that intraspecific diversity is a less critical determinant of ecosystem function than is interspecific diversity. Given existing evidence for contemporary evolution in these fish species, our findings suggest considerable potential for eco-evolutionary feedbacks to operate as populations adapt to natural or anthropogenic perturbations.

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 · 10.1098/rstb.2009.0016

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 181

Metadata

Authors
Palkovacs, E. P., Marshall, M. C., Lamphere, B. A., Lynch, B. R., Weese, D. J., Fraser, D. F., Reznick, D. N., Pringle, C. M., & Kinnison, M. T.
Venue
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
Published
2009-06-12
Volume
364
Issue
1523
Pages
1617-1628
ISSN
  • 0962-8436 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-2970
OpenAlex
W2138307167
Cited by
181
References
2
FWCI
11.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Experimental evaluation of evolution and coevolution as agents of ecosystem change in Trinidadian streams. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rstb.2009.0016
The paper
Palkovacs, E. P., Marshall, M. C., Lamphere, B. A., Lynch, B. R., Weese, D. J., Fraser, D. F., Reznick, D. N., Pringle, C. M., & Kinnison, M. T. (2009). Experimental evaluation of evolution and coevolution as agents of ecosystem change in Trinidadian streams. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0016

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.