The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Coexistence of perennial plants: an embarrassment of niches
Abstract
Ecology Letters (2010) 13: 1019–1029 Despite decades of research documenting niche differences between species, we lack a quantitative understanding of their effect on coexistence in natural communities. We perturbed an empirical sagebrush steppe community model to remove the demographic effect of niche differences and quantify their impact on coexistence. With stabilizing mechanisms operating, all species showed positive growth rates when rare, generating stable coexistence. Fluctuation‐independent mechanisms contributed more than temporal variability to coexistence and operated more strongly on recruitment than growth or survival. As expected, removal of stabilizing niche differences led to extinction of all inferior competitors. However, complete exclusion required 300–400 years, indicating small fitness differences among species. Our results show an ‘excess’ of niche differences: stabilizing mechanisms were not only strong enough to maintain diversity but were much stronger than necessary given the small fitness differences. The diversity of this community cannot be understood without consideration of niche differences.
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
Mechanisms of Maintenance of Species Diversity
Chesson, P. (2000) · Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.31.1.343 · Cited by 6,645
Fluctuations in the Abundance of a Species considered Mathematically1
VOLTERRA, V. (1926) · Nature · doi:10.1038/118558a0 · Cited by 2,054
Cited by
Rethinking Community Assembly through the Lens of Coexistence Theory
HilleRisLambers, J., Adler, P. B., Harpole, W. S., Levine, J. M., & Mayfield, M. M. (2012) · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110411-160411 · Cited by 1,448
Self-citationDoes conservation on farmland contribute to halting the biodiversity decline?
Kleijn, D., Rundlöf, M., Scheper, J., Smith, H. G., & Tscharntke, T. (2011) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2011.05.009 · Cited by 671
Linking modern coexistence theory and contemporary niche theory
Letten, A. D., Ke, P., & Fukami, T. (2017) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.1002/ecm.1242 · Cited by 363
An overview of agent-based models in plant biology and ecology
Zhang, B., & DeAngelis, D. L. (2020) · Annals of Botany · doi:10.1093/aob/mcaa043 · Cited by 93
Permanence via invasion graphs: incorporating community assembly into modern coexistence theory
Hofbauer, J., & Schreiber, S. J. (2022) · Journal of Mathematical Biology · doi:10.1007/s00285-022-01815-2 · Cited by 35
Metadata
- Authors
- Adler, P. B., Ellner, S. P., & Levine, J. M.
- Venue
- Ecology Letters
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-07-14
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1019-1029
- ISSN
- 1461-023X (ISSN-L)
- 1461-0248
- OpenAlex
- W2148836897
- Cited by
- 348
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 11.53
- 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: Coexistence of perennial plants: an embarrassment of niches. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01496.x
- The paper
- Adler, P. B., Ellner, S. P., & Levine, J. M. (2010). Coexistence of perennial plants: an embarrassment of niches. Ecology Letters. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01496.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.