The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
WHAT DETERMINES THE STRENGTH OF A TROPHIC CASCADE?
Open accessAbstract
Trophic cascades have been documented in a diversity of ecological systems and can be important in determining biomass distribution within a community. To date, the literature on trophic cascades has focused on whether and in which systems cascades occur. Many biological (e.g., productivity : biomass ratios) and methodological (e.g., experiment size or duration) factors vary with the ecosystem in which data were collected, but ecosystem type, per se, does not provide mechanistic insights into factors controlling cascade strength. Here, we tested various hypotheses about why trophic cascades occur and what determines their magnitude using data from 114 studies that measured the indirect trophic effects of predators on plant community biomass in seven aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Using meta-analysis, we examined the relationship between the indirect effect of predator manipulation on plants and 18 biological and methodological factors quantified from these studies. We found, in contrast to predictions, that high system productivity and low species diversity do not consistently generate larger trophic cascades. A combination of herbivore and predator metabolic factors and predator taxonomy (vertebrate vs. invertebrate) explained 31% of the variation in cascade strength among all 114 studies. Within systems, 18% of the variation in cascade strength was explained with similar predator and herbivore characteristics. Within and across all systems, the strongest cascades occurred in association with invertebrate herbivores and endothermic vertebrate predators. These associations may result from a combination of true biological differences among species with different physiological requirements and bias among organisms studied in different systems. Thus, although cascade strength can be described by biological characteristics of predators and herbivores, future research on indirect trophic effects must further examine biological and methodological differences among studies and systems.
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
The meta-analysis of response ratios in experimental ecology
Hedges, L. V., Gurevitch, J., & Curtis, P. S. (1999) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(1999)080[1150:tmaorr]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 4,704 · cited 1×
“In contrast to many response metrics, the log ratio does not vary with the level of replication or the magnitude of the average biomass in a study (Englund et al. 1999) and meets the assumptions of parametric analyses (Hedges et al. 1999).”
BackgroundCommunity structure, population control, and competition.
Hairston, N. G., Smith, F. E., & Slobodkin, L. B. (1960) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/282146 · Cited by 3,492
Food Web Complexity and Community Dynamics
Polis, G. A., & Strong, D. R. (1996) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/285880 · Cited by 2,109
Exploitation Ecosystems in Gradients of Primary Productivity
Oksanen, L., Fretwell, S. D., Arruda, J., & Niemela, P. (1981) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/283817 · Cited by 1,767
Hunter, M. D., & Price, P. W. (1992) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1940152 · Cited by 1,717
Nutritional constraints in terrestrial and freshwater food webs
Elser, J. J., Fagan, W. F., Denno, R. F., Dobberfuhl, D. R., Folarin, A., Huberty, A., Interlandi, S., Kilham, S. S., McCauley, E., Schulz, K. L., et al. (2000) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35046058 · Cited by 1,645
Menge, B. A., & Sutherland, J. P. (1987) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/284741 · Cited by 1,587
Trophic cascades revealed in diverse ecosystems
Pace, M. L., Cole, J. J., Carpenter, S. R., & Kitchell, J. F. (1999) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(99)01723-1 · Cited by 1,478
A Theoretical Framework for Intraguild Predation
Holt, R. D., & Polis, G. A. (1997) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/286018 · Cited by 1,245
Are Trophic Cascades All Wet? Differentiation and Donor‐Control in Speciose Ecosystems
Strong, D. R. (1992) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1940154 · Cited by 1,091
Cited by
Status and Ecological Effects of the World’s Largest Carnivores
Ripple, W. J., Estes, J. A., Beschta, R. L., Wilmers, C. C., Ritchie, E. G., Hebblewhite, M., Berger, J., Elmhagen, B., Letnic, M., Nelson, M. P., et al. (2014) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1241484 · Cited by 3,667
Meta-analysis reveals negative yet variable effects of ocean acidification on marine organisms
Kroeker, K. J., Kordas, R. L., Crim, R. N., & Singh, G. G. (2010) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01518.x · Cited by 1,621
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
Letourneau, D. K., Jedlicka, J. A., Bothwell, S. G., & Moreno, C. R. (2009) · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.110308.120320 · Cited by 596
Metadata
- Authors
- Borer, E. T., Seabloom, E. W., Shurin, J. B., Anderson, K. E., Blanchette, C. A., Broitman, B., Cooper, S. D., & Halpern, B. S.
- Venue
- Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-02
- Volume
- 86
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 528-537
- ISSN
- 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2104980495
- Cited by
- 560
- References
- 50
- FWCI
- 23.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: WHAT DETERMINES THE STRENGTH OF A TROPHIC CASCADE? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1890/03-0816
- The paper
- Borer, E. T., Seabloom, E. W., Shurin, J. B., Anderson, K. E., Blanchette, C. A., Broitman, B., Cooper, S. D., & Halpern, B. S. (2005). WHAT DETERMINES THE STRENGTH OF A TROPHIC CASCADE? Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1890/03-0816
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.
