Cited by 1,834Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesEvolution and Genetic DynamicsGenetic diversity and population structure

Ecological consequences of genetic diversity

Open access
Hughes, A. Randall, Inouye, Brian D., Johnson, Marc T. J., Underwood, Nora, Vellend, Mark·2008·Ecology Letters

Abstract

Understanding the ecological consequences of biodiversity is a fundamental challenge. Research on a key component of biodiversity, genetic diversity, has traditionally focused on its importance in evolutionary processes, but classical studies in evolutionary biology, agronomy and conservation biology indicate that genetic diversity might also have important ecological effects. Our review of the literature reveals significant effects of genetic diversity on ecological processes such as primary productivity, population recovery from disturbance, interspecific competition, community structure, and fluxes of energy and nutrients. Thus, genetic diversity can have important ecological consequences at the population, community and ecosystem levels, and in some cases the effects are comparable in magnitude to the effects of species diversity. However, it is not clear how widely these results apply in nature, as studies to date have been biased towards manipulations of plant clonal diversity, and little is known about the relative importance of genetic diversity vs. other factors that influence ecological processes of interest. Future studies should focus not only on documenting the presence of genetic diversity effects but also on identifying underlying mechanisms and predicting when such effects are likely to occur in nature.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01179.x

Cites

116 of 116 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hughes, A. R., Inouye, B. D., Johnson, M. T. J., Underwood, N., & Vellend, M.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Davis (US)
  • Florida State University (US)
  • Duke University (US)
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
Venue
Ecology Letters
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-04-08
Volume
11
Issue
6
Pages
609-623
ISSN
  • 1461-023X (ISSN-L)
  • 1461-0248
OpenAlex
W2120405557
Cited by
1,834
References
116
Citations by year
2026: 82 · 2025: 126 · 2024: 118 · 2023: 134 · 2022: 98 · 2021: 137 · 2020: 130 · 2019: 105 · 2018: 124 · 2017: 121 · 2016: 109 · 2015: 104 · 2014: 94 · 2013: 75 · 2012: 71
FWCI
5.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Ecology Letters (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic diversity and population structure
Keywords
genetic diversity, primary productivity, interspecific competition, community structure, species diversity, ecosystem functioning
MeSH terms
Ecology, Biological Evolution, Models, Biological, Population Dynamics, Species Specificity, Genetic Variation, Ecosystem

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