Does Vegetation Science exist?

Wilson, J. Bastow

doi:10.1111/j.1654-1103.1991.tb01131.x

Cited by 121 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, there is very little evidence for assembly rules, tested against a null model, and even less in plant communities (Wilson 1991b), exceptions for plant communities being work such as Cody (1986), Mohler (1990), Watkins & Wilson (1992), Wilson & Lee (1994), Wilson & Roxburgh (1994), and .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Community structure and assembly rules in a dune slack: Variance in richness, guild proportionality, biomass constancy and dominance/diversity relations

Wilson

Gitay

1995

Vegetatio

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is still disagreement as to whether plant communities can be described as conforming to certain assembly rules. We searched for such rules in the vegetation of four dune slacks in west Wales by examining variance in richness, guild proportionality, biomass constancy and dominance/diversity relations. To test for the occurrence of niche limitation, variance in quadrat species-richness was compared to null models of species occurrence. Using an Overall-model, one site showed a deficit of variance, but this disappeared when a Patch-model analysis was used. It therefore seems likely that the effect observed was due to equality in the species pools adapted to different microenvironments. The proportional representation of functional guilds was examined, in guilds based on morphology and life history. Significant constancy of guild proportions was seen for the annual guild in the only site in which it occurred, perhaps reflecting a regeneration niche. Total biomass per quadrat was examined, and compared to a model in which the biomass of each species was determined at random from the biomasses of that species at the site. Surprisingly, the observed biomasses showed no departure from the null model. However, there was considerable discrepancy from an alternative null model in which biomasses were allocated at random irrespective of species. This would imply that competition limits species coexistence, rather than performance. Examination of the proportions of species from different potential-size classes in each quadrat gave limited confirmation. The local abundance of species (mean biomass) was significantly correlated with the frequency of the species within a site, parallelling the geographical-range/local-abundance correlation previously reported. Five dominance/diversity models were fitted to the biomass data. The best fits were given by the Geometric or the General Lognormal models, though which fitted best varied between and within sites. Between sites, there was some indication of a consistent difference in Preston's 'gamma'. Most of the results are compatible with Gleason's Individualistic concept of the plant community, though there are several pointers that assembly rules have some impact on community structure.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Community structure and assembly rules in a dune slack: Variance in richness, guild proportionality, biomass constancy and dominance/diversity relations

Wilson

Gitay

1995

Vegetatio

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite the empirical studies of Cherrett (1989) and Shrader-Frechette and McCoy (1993) we maintain that the "community" is the central level of obser-vation and research in ecology (see Trepl 1988;Egerton 1968Egerton , 1979McIntosh 1985 The community is obviously a level which is difficult to define (see Wilson 1991;Shrader-Frechette and McCoy 1993). Ultimately, community and population, as introduced above, are only distinguishable by using a non-ecological taxonomic criterion (Allen and Hoekstra 1990).…”

Section: Conclusion On the Nature Of The Communitymentioning

confidence: 95%

Ecological Orientors: Pattern and Process of Succession in Relation to Ecological Orientors

Bröring¹,

Wiegleb²

1998

Eco Targets, Goal Functions, and Orientors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A theoretical analysis reveals that the concept of "succession" is generally applied both to community and ecosystem phenomena, which must be kept strictly apart. "Succession" is also applied to phenomena which we call "dynamics". "change" and "development". Additionally. any satisfactory theory on the temporal behavior of ecological systems must account for both succession and its logical counterpart. constancy. Furthermore. it is shown that the community level is difficult to distinguish from both the population and the ecosystem level. Important community characteristics which enable us to delimit the community from other observation levels can be drawn from the analysis of semiautonomous behavior of hierarchically ordered levels. A list of aspects relating to semiautonomy distinguishing the community both from the ecosystem and the population is presented. The confusion relating to key concepts of spatial and temporal relations in ecological systems is outlined. Different terminologies are necessary to speak about observational and theoretical entities. "Pattern" and "process" are adequate terms of an observational terminology. while "structure" and "function" are terms of theoretical reasoning. Also. discreteness or continuity of phenomena must be described in different terms. The term "process" accounts for continuous phenomena. while the term "event" is necessary to describe discrete ones.An analysis of special problems of succession theory shows that descriptive succession theory must take into account three classes of change: changes in species composition. changes in important functional characters. and changes in type. An exhaustive causal repertoire of successional mechanisms is listed. The same mechanisms lead to either change or constancy. or to past. present. and future states of a system. Special emphasis is put on the deduction of zero-force laws. An inquiry of the reduction of community phenomena to population phenomena shows that invasion. maintenance. and extinction require different models of causality. While a causal theory for invasion is elaborated. maintenance and extinction are not yet well understood. Predictive succession theory is also not well developed. In an overview 15 successional theories are listed which F. Muller M. Leupelt (Eds.) Eco Targets. Goal Functions. and Orientors

show abstract

“…Communities are even harder to define (Wilson 1991;Keddy 1993;Palmer & White 1994), and this may one of the reasons that Lawton (1999) questioned the relevance of community ecology, though he did not question the equally nebulous concept of "population". Shrader-Frechette & McCoy (1993) wrote a whole book showing that the concept of community leads nowhere, but gave no alternative except to revert to independent case studies.…”

Section: Communitymentioning

confidence: 99%

The words population and community have outlived their usefulness in ecological publications

Magnusson¹

2013

NatCon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concepts of "population" and "community" are so fundamental to the identity of ecological science that their use is almost never questioned, even though many authors have noted that neither has a generally accepted definition. Authors continue to invent new definitions without noting that their definitions will exclude most other ecologists. While there have been many publications questioning the utility of particular lines of ecological enquiry, these have had little effect on ecological practice, and recent ecological papers have few fundamental differences from those published half a century ago, despite the huge advances in analytical techniques. Complaining about others' definitions or suggesting that others should use your definition does not qualify as a method. Here I propose a simple method to increase the utility of ecological publications for conservation that would go far towards solving the problems that have been identified by many authors -stop using the words "population" and "community". The words "population" and "community", as used by ecologists and conservationists, are at best redundant, and almost always retard understanding by scientists and decision makers. The simple expedient of reviewers and editors requesting that authors do not use these words would make authors have to make their methods and assumptions explicit, and the conservation science more useful.

show abstract

Does Vegetation Science exist?

Cited by 121 publications

References 19 publications

Community structure and assembly rules in a dune slack: Variance in richness, guild proportionality, biomass constancy and dominance/diversity relations

Community structure and assembly rules in a dune slack: Variance in richness, guild proportionality, biomass constancy and dominance/diversity relations

Ecological Orientors: Pattern and Process of Succession in Relation to Ecological Orientors

The words population and community have outlived their usefulness in ecological publications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About