The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Boundary Dynamics: A Conceptual Framework for Studying Landscape Ecosystems
Abstract
We develop a conceptual foundation for the investigation of ecosystem patterns and processes that explicitly considers the spatial patchiness of ecological landscapes. Our emphasis is on the factors determining the location of boundaries between patch types in a landscape mosaic, how boundaries affect ecological processes and the movement of materials over an area, and how imbalances in these transfers in space can affect boundary characteristics and landscape configuration. We suggest that, other things being equal, the edaphic patterns of a landscape will determine the spatial patterning of the biota in the system, primarily through their effects on vegetation. Boundaries in a landscape may be located as direct consequences of the edaphic pattern, or may reflect perturbations of this underlying pattern due to physical disturbances or the actions of various transfer agents or vectors. Abiotic vectors such as wind or surface water flow respond differently to boundary features than do biotic vectors such as beetles or rodents. Both abiotic and biotic vectors may create disturbances through their actions, which in turn may alter patch boundary locations. Vectors also contribute directly to movements of materials, energy, or organisms over the landscape, both within and between patches, and thereby may determine the spatial patterns of the spread of perturbations through the system. If there are net imbalances in fluxes or the spread of disturbances across boundaries in relation to within-patch processes, a directional bias to system fluxes will be established. Over time, this changes the characteristics and locations of patch boundaries. Boundaries thus have dynamics that are superimposed on the edaphic foundation. Consideration of these dynamics offers the potential to gain insight into the spatial configuration of ecosystem functioning and emphasizes the value of a reductionist approach to ecosystem studies.
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
Cited by
Modification of Ecosystems by Ungulates
Hobbs, N. T. (1996) · The Journal of Wildlife Management · doi:10.2307/3802368 · Cited by 1,016
Graph models of habitat mosaics
Urban, D. L., Minor, E. S., Treml, E. A., & Schick, R. S. (2009) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01271.x · Cited by 539
How does landscape structure influence landscape connectivity?
Goodwin, B. J., & Fahrig, L. (2002) · Oikos · doi:10.1034/j.1600-0706.2002.11824.x · Cited by 193
Connectivity measures: a review
Kindlmann, P., & Burel, F. (2008) · Landscape Ecology · doi:10.1007/s10980-008-9245-4 · Cited by 124
Restoration and management of riparian ecosystems: a catchment perspective
Wissmar, R. C., & Beschta, R. L. (1998) · Freshwater Biology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2427.1998.00383.x · Cited by 108
Metadata
- Authors
- Wiens, J. A., Crawford, C. S., & Gosz, J. R.
- Venue
- Oikos
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1985-12
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 421
- ISSN
- 0030-1299 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2014121094
- Cited by
- 515
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 10.60
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Boundary Dynamics: A Conceptual Framework for Studying Landscape Ecosystems. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/3565577
- The paper
- Wiens, J. A., Crawford, C. S., & Gosz, J. R. (1985). Boundary Dynamics: A Conceptual Framework for Studying Landscape Ecosystems. Oikos. https://doi.org/10.2307/3565577
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.