The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A meta‐analysis of biotic resistance to exotic plant invasions
Abstract
Biotic resistance describes the ability of resident species in a community to reduce the success of exotic invasions. Although resistance is a well‐accepted phenomenon, less clear are the processes that contribute most to it, and whether those processes are strong enough to completely repel invaders. Current perceptions of strong, competition‐driven biotic resistance stem from classic ecological theory, Elton's formulation of ecological resistance, and the general acceptance of the enemies‐release hypothesis. We conducted a meta‐analysis of the plant invasions literature to quantify the contribution of resident competitors, diversity, herbivores and soil fungal communities to biotic resistance. Results indicated large negative effects of all factors except fungal communities on invader establishment and performance. Contrary to predictions derived from the natural enemies hypothesis, resident herbivores reduced invasion success as effectively as resident competitors. Although biotic resistance significantly reduced the establishment of individual invaders, we found little evidence that species interactions completely repelled invasions. We conclude that ecological interactions rarely enable communities to resist invasion, but instead constrain the abundance of invasive species once they have successfully established.
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
Pseudoreplication and the Design of Ecological Field Experiments
Hurlbert, S. H. (1984) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.2307/1942661 · Cited by 8,377
Cited by
Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity—Ecosystem service management
Tscharntke, T., Klein, A. M., Kruess, A., Steffan‐Dewenter, I., & Thies, C. (2005) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00782.x · Cited by 4,455
Alien species in a warmer world: risks and opportunities
Walther, G.-R., Roques, A., Hulme, P. E., Sykes, M. T., Pyšek, P., Kühn, I., Zobel, M., Bacher, S., Botta-Dukát, Z., & Bugmann, H. (2009) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2009.06.008 · Cited by 1,424
Early, R., Bradley, B. A., Dukes, J. S., Lawler, J. J., Olden, J. D., Blumenthal, D. M., Gonzalez, P., Grosholz, E. D., Ibañez, I., Miller, L. P., et al. (2016) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms12485 · Cited by 1,377
Progress toward understanding the ecological impacts of nonnative species
Ricciardi, A., Hoopes, M. F., Marchetti, M. P., & Lockwood, J. L. (2013) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.1890/13-0183.1 · Cited by 760
Benefits of increasing plant diversity in sustainable agroecosystems
Isbell, F., Adler, P. R., Eisenhauer, N., Fornara, D., Kimmel, K., Kremen, C., Letourneau, D. K., Liebman, M., Polley, H. W., Quijas, S., et al. (2017) · Journal of Ecology · doi:10.1111/1365-2745.12789 · Cited by 616
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Levine, J. M., Adler, P. B., & Yelenik, S. G.
- Venue
- Ecology Letters
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-09-06
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 975-989
- ISSN
- 1461-023X (ISSN-L)
- 1461-0248
- OpenAlex
- W2157560775
- Cited by
- 1,499
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 26.32
- 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 biotic resistance to exotic plant invasions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00657.x
- The paper
- Levine, J. M., Adler, P. B., & Yelenik, S. G. (2004). A meta‐analysis of biotic resistance to exotic plant invasions. Ecology Letters. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00657.x
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.