Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,377

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Elton Revisited: A Review of Evidence Linking Diversity and Invasibility

Levine, Jonathan M., D'Antonio, Carla M.·1999·Oikos

Abstract

It is commonly believed that diverse communities better resist invasion by exotic species than do simple communities. We examined the history of this notion, and evaluated theoretical and empirical work linking diversity and invasions. We found that much of the historical work that has contributed to the perception that diverse communities are less invasible, including Elton's observations and MacArthur's species-packing and diversity-stability models, is based on controversial premises. Nevertheless, more recent theoretical studies consistently supported the predicted negative relationship between diversity and invasibility. The results of empirical studies, however, were decidedly mixed. Constructed community studies directly manipulating diversity found both positive and negative effects of diversity on invasibility in both field and microcosm settings. Other empirical studies tracking the assembly of ecological communities generally suggested that communities decline in invasibility as species accumulate over time, though the role of diversity itself was often ambiguous. Studies of the spatial correlation between diversity and invasion and studies experimentally adding invaders to natural systems indicated that diverse communities tend to be more invasible. We argue that these results most likely reflect environmental factors spatially covarying with diversity in natural communities (e.g. resources, disturbance). and not the effects of diversity itself as uncovered by constructed community studies. Nevertheless, the consistent positive relationship between exotic species abundance and resident species diversity found in spatial pattern studies suggests that invaders and resident species are more similar than often believed, and the implications of this for theories of invasion are discussed.

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 · 10.2307/3546992

Cites

2 of 2 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

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 2 references

Cited by

See all 1,377

Metadata

Authors
Levine, J. M., & D'Antonio, C. M.
Venue
Oikos
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1999-10
Volume
87
Issue
1
Pages
15
ISSN
0030-1299 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2105022406
Cited by
1,377
References
2
FWCI
29.81
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: Elton Revisited: A Review of Evidence Linking Diversity and Invasibility. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/3546992
The paper
Levine, J. M., & D'Antonio, C. M. (1999). Elton Revisited: A Review of Evidence Linking Diversity and Invasibility. Oikos. https://doi.org/10.2307/3546992

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.