CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 444Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesForest Ecology and Biodiversity StudiesPlant and animal studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 68 of the 68 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

WHICH TRAITS OF SPECIES PREDICT POPULATION DECLINES IN EXPERIMENTAL FOREST FRAGMENTS?

Davies, Kendi F., Margules, Chris R., Lawrence, John F.·2000·Ecology
DOI 10.1890/0012-9658(2000)081[1450:wtospp]2.0.co;2
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Theory suggests that species with particular traits are at greater risk of extinction than others. We assumed that a decline in abundance in forest fragments, compared to continuous forest, equated to an increase in extinction risk. We then tested the relationships between five traits of species and decline in abundance for 69 beetle species in an experimentally fragmented forest landscape at Mt. Wog Wog in southeastern Australia. The experiment was controlled and replicated. Monitoring ran for two years before forest fragmentation; in this paper, we examine data for five years postfragmentation. We tested five hypotheses: (1) Species that occur naturally at low abundance are more likely to decline as a result of fragmentation than are abundant species. (2) Isolated species are more likely to decline than species that are not isolated. (3) Large species are more likely to decline than small species. (4) Species in trophic groups at the top end of food chains are more likely to decline than species in trophic groups lower in the food chain. (5) Because traits are often shared by related species, populations of more closely related species will respond in the same way. We found that: (1) rare species were more likely to decline than abundant species; (2) isolated species were more likely to decline than species that were not isolated; (3) body size was not correlated with response to fragmentation; (4) among species that declined, predators declined most; and (5) taxonomically related species did not respond in the same way to fragmentation. Thus, our results confirm theories predicting that isolated, rare, or predaceous species will be lost first from fragmented landscapes.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1890/0012-9658(2000)081[1450:wtospp]2.0.co;2

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • If optimal hosts are uncommon, they are more likely to be present in species-rich communities than species-poor communities.

    “If optimal hosts are uncommon, they are more likely to be present in species-rich communities than species-poor communities (Davies et al. 2000)”

    From Avian host community structure and prevalence of West Nile virus in Chicago, Illinois (2009) · cites this paper as Davies et al. 2000

  • The simple theoretical prediction that fragmentation reduces species richness is being modified to account for species identity through models that focus on how species vary in their traits.

    “Increasingly, the simple theoretical prediction that fragmentation reduces species richness is being modified to account for species identity through models that focus on how species vary in their traits (4, 21, 36, 48, 57, 58).”

    From Habitat fragmentation and its lasting impact on Earth’s ecosystems (2015) · cites this paper as [48]

  • More realistic predictions of community responses to fragmentation emerged after explicit consideration of species traits such as rarity and trophic levels, dispersal mode, reproductive mode and life span, diet, and movement behavior.

    “More realistic predictions of community responses to fragmentation emerged after explicit consideration of species traits such as rarity and trophic levels (48, 49), dispersal mode (50–52), reproductive mode and life span (29, 53), diet (54), and movement behavior (55, 56).”

    From Habitat fragmentation and its lasting impact on Earth’s ecosystems (2015) · cites this paper as [48]

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Davies, K. F., Margules, C. R., & Lawrence, J. F.
Affiliations
  • Australian National University (AU)
  • Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU)
ORCID
Venue
Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-05
Volume
81
Issue
5
Pages
1450-1461
ISSN
0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1890/0012-9658(2000)081[1450:wtospp]2.0.co;2
OpenAlex
W2080040160
Cited by
444
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 33 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 19
FWCI
20.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1 (tdm, 5601 d)
Locations
  • Ecology (publishedVersion)
  • ResearchOnline at James Cook University (James Cook University) (submittedVersion)
  • ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Australian National University
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Insect Science › Forest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Plant and animal studies
Keywords
forest fragmentation, population decline (ecology), extinction risk, species traits, beetle abundance, rare species, body size, trophic position, predators, phylogenetic relatedness

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