The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Beyond species: why ecological interaction networks vary through space and time
Abstract
Community ecology is tasked with the considerable challenge of predicting the structure, and properties, of emerging ecosystems. It requires the ability to understand how and why species interact, as this will allow the development of mechanism‐based predictive models, and as such to better characterize how ecological mechanisms act locally on the existence of inter‐specific interactions. Here we argue that the current conceptualization of species interaction networks is ill‐suited for this task. Instead, we propose that future research must start to account for the intrinsic variability of species interactions, then scale up from here onto complex networks. This can be accomplished simply by recognizing that there exists intra‐specific variability, in traits or properties related to the establishment of species interactions. By shifting the scale towards population‐based processes, we show that this new approach will improve our predictive ability and mechanistic understanding of how species interact over large spatial or temporal scales. Synthesis Although species interactions are the backbone of ecological communities, we have little insights on how (and why) they vary through space and time. In this article, we build on existing empirical literature to show that the same species may happen to interact in different ways when their local abundances vary, their trait distribution changes, or when the environment affects either of these factors. We discuss how these findings can be integrated in existing frameworks for the analysis and simulation of species interactions.
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
Trophic Downgrading of Planet Earth
Estes, J. A., Terborgh, J., Brashares, J. S., Power, M. E., Berger, J., Bond, W. J., Carpenter, S. R., Essington, T. E., Holt, R. D., Jackson, J. B. C., et al. (2011) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1205106 · Cited by 4,087
The functional role of biodiversity in ecosystems: incorporating trophic complexity
Duffy, J. E., Cardinale, B. J., France, K. E., McIntyre, P. B., Thébault, E., & Loreau, M. (2007) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2007.01037.x · Cited by 1,065
Spatial Guilds in the Serengeti Food Web Revealed by a Bayesian Group Model
Baskerville, E. B., Dobson, A. P., Bedford, T., Allesina, S., Anderson, T. M., & Pascual, M. (2011) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002321 · Cited by 113
Cited by
Interaction rewiring and the rapid turnover of plant–pollinator networks
CaraDonna, P. J., Petry, W. K., Brennan, R. M., Cunningham, J. L., Bronstein, J. L., Waser, N. M., & Sanders, N. J. (2017) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/ele.12740 · Cited by 395
Pichler, M., Boreux, V., Klein, A., Schleuning, M., & Hartig, F. (2020) · Methods in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.13329 · Cited by 149
The difficulties of systematic reviews
Westgate, M. J., & Lindenmayer, D. B. (2017) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/cobi.12890 · Cited by 62
Metadata
- Authors
- Poisot, T., Stouffer, D. B., & Gravel, D.
- Venue
- Oikos
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-11-04
- Volume
- 124
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 243-251
- ISSN
- 0030-1299 (ISSN-L)
- 1600-0706
- OpenAlex
- W2147323780
- Cited by
- 472
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 21.60
- 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
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.