Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,248

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Loss of foundation species: consequences for the structure and dynamics of forested ecosystems

Ellison, Aaron M., Bank, Michael S., Clinton, Barton D., Colburn, Elizabeth A., Elliott, Katherine, Ford, Chelcy R., Foster, David R., Kloeppel, Brian D., Knoepp, Jennifer D., Lovett, Gary M., Mohan, Jacqueline, Orwig, David A., Rodenhouse, Nicholas L., Sobczak, William V., Stinson, Kristina A., Stone, Jeffrey K., Swan, Christopher M., Thompson, Jill, Von Holle, Betsy, Webster, Jackson R.·2005·Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment

Abstract

In many forested ecosystems, the architecture and functional ecology of certain tree species define forest structure and their species-specific traits control ecosystem dynamics. Such foundation tree species are declining throughout the world due to introductions and outbreaks of pests and pathogens, selective removal of individual taxa, and over-harvesting. Through a series of case studies, we show that the loss of foundation tree species changes the local environment on which a variety of other species depend; how this disrupts fundamental ecosystem processes, including rates of decomposition, nutrient fluxes, carbon sequestration, and energy flow; and dramatically alters the dynamics of associated aquatic ecosystems. Forests in which dynamics are controlled by one or a few foundation species appear to be dominated by a small number of strong interactions and may be highly susceptible to alternating between stable states following even small perturbations. The ongoing decline of many foundation species provides a set of important, albeit unfortunate, opportunities to develop the research tools, models, and metrics needed to identify foundation species, anticipate the cascade of immediate, short- and long-term changes in ecosystem structure and function that will follow from their loss, and provide options for remedial conservation and management.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1890/1540-9295(2005)003[0479:lofscf]2.0.co;2

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

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

Show all 44 references

Cited by

See all 1,248

Metadata

Authors
Ellison, A. M., Bank, M. S., Clinton, B. D., Colburn, E. A., Elliott, K., Ford, C. R., Foster, D. R., Kloeppel, B. D., Knoepp, J. D., Lovett, G. M., Mohan, J., Orwig, D. A., Rodenhouse, N. L., Sobczak, W. V., Stinson, K. A., Stone, J. K., Swan, C. M., Thompson, J., Von Holle, B., & Webster, J. R.
Venue
Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-11
Volume
3
Issue
9
Pages
479-486
ISSN
1540-9295
Cited by
1,248
References
44
Language
en
Licence
doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1 (tdm, 3591 d)

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: Loss of foundation species: consequences for the structure and dynamics of forested ecosystems. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1890/1540-9295(2005)003%5B0479:lofscf%5D2.0.co;2
The paper
Ellison, A. M., Bank, M. S., Clinton, B. D., Colburn, E. A., Elliott, K., Ford, C. R., Foster, D. R., Kloeppel, B. D., Knoepp, J. D., Lovett, G. M., Mohan, J., Orwig, D. A., Rodenhouse, N. L., Sobczak, W. V., Stinson, K. A., Stone, J. K., Swan, C. M., Thompson, J., Von Holle, B., & Webster, J. R. (2005). Loss of foundation species: consequences for the structure and dynamics of forested ecosystems. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. https://doi.org/10.1890/1540-9295(2005)003%5B0479%3Alofscf%5D2.0.co%3B2

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.