1998
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2656.1998.00223.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Individualistic species responses invalidate simple physiological models of community dynamics under global environmental change

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
228
2

Year Published

2005
2005
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 267 publications
(236 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
6
228
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Birds increased richness by selectively removing abundant carnivorous arthropods, with a particularly strong impact on one introduced spider species (Gruner 2005). This result further highlights the individuality of species traits in creating community pattern (Leibold 1996;Davis et al 1998).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 72%
“…Birds increased richness by selectively removing abundant carnivorous arthropods, with a particularly strong impact on one introduced spider species (Gruner 2005). This result further highlights the individuality of species traits in creating community pattern (Leibold 1996;Davis et al 1998).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 72%
“…This climate envelope can then be used to predict the future distribution of species under various climate change scenarios (34). However, climate envelope models have been criticized because they do not integrate the effects of species interactions and dispersal on the distribution of population abundance (35)(36)(37)(38). A recent synthesis proposes integrating the effects of dispersal and species interactions into climate envelopes by adopting a hierarchical modeling framework (34).…”
Section: Effect Of Dispersal and Species Interactions On Natural And mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This attention has primarily focused on individual organisms, particularly the very abundant (e.g., pests) or the very rare (e.g., threatened and endangered), or on community-level analyses assessing impacts on biodiversity. Studies have rarely considered impacts on interactions involving multiple trophic levels (Davis et al 1998;Janson et al 2009;Six 2009). In particular, very little attention has been given to effects of anthropogenic change on mutualisms, despite the fact that these symbioses are among the most important drivers of ecosystem function, structure, and process (Boucher et al 1982;Margulis and Fester 1991;Douglas 1994;Maynard Smith and Szathmary 1995;Del-Claro and Torezan-Silingardi 2009;Kiers et al 2010), and alterations in their composition and outcomes are likely to ramify throughout affected systems (Six 2009;Kiers et al 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%