Book•
Stability and Complexity in Model Ecosystems
21 Aug 1973-
TL;DR: Preface vii Preface to the Second Edition Biology Edition 1.
Abstract: Preface vii Preface to the Second Edition Biology Edition 1. Intoduction 3 2. Mathematical Models and Stability 13 3. Stability versus Complexity in Multispecies Models 4. Models with Few Species: Limit Cycles and Time Delays 79 5. Randomly Fluctuating Environments 109 6. Niche Overlap and Limiting Similarity 139 7. Speculations 172 Appendices 187 Afterthoughts for the Second Edition 211 Bibliography to Afterthoghts 234 Bibliography 241 Author Index 259 Subject Index 263
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: This work aims to understand how an enormous network of interacting dynamical systems — be they neurons, power stations or lasers — will behave collectively, given their individual dynamics and coupling architecture.
Abstract: The study of networks pervades all of science, from neurobiology to statistical physics. The most basic issues are structural: how does one characterize the wiring diagram of a food web or the Internet or the metabolic network of the bacterium Escherichia coli? Are there any unifying principles underlying their topology? From the perspective of nonlinear dynamics, we would also like to understand how an enormous network of interacting dynamical systems-be they neurons, power stations or lasers-will behave collectively, given their individual dynamics and coupling architecture. Researchers are only now beginning to unravel the structure and dynamics of complex networks.
7,665 citations
Western Washington University1, University of Alaska Fairbanks2, United States Forest Service3, University of Zurich4, Centre national de la recherche scientifique5, Natural Environment Research Council6, University of Notre Dame7, École Normale Supérieure8, Columbia University9, University of Helsinki10, United States Geological Survey11, University of Michigan12, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences13, Landcare Research14
TL;DR: Understanding this complexity, while taking strong steps to minimize current losses of species, is necessary for responsible management of Earth's ecosystems and the diverse biota they contain.
Abstract: Humans are altering the composition of biological communities through a variety of activities that increase rates of species invasions and species extinctions, at all scales, from local to global. These changes in components of the Earth's biodiversity cause concern for ethical and aesthetic reasons, but they also have a strong potential to alter ecosystem properties and the goods and services they provide to humanity. Ecological experiments, observations, and theoretical developments show that ecosystem properties depend greatly on biodiversity in terms of the functional characteristics of organisms present in the ecosystem and the distribution and abundance of those organisms over space and time. Species effects act in concert with the effects of climate, resource availability, and disturbance regimes in influencing ecosystem properties. Human activities can modify all of the above factors; here we focus on modification of these biotic controls. The scientific community has come to a broad consensus on many aspects of the re- lationship between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning, including many points relevant to management of ecosystems. Further progress will require integration of knowledge about biotic and abiotic controls on ecosystem properties, how ecological communities are struc- tured, and the forces driving species extinctions and invasions. To strengthen links to policy and management, we also need to integrate our ecological knowledge with understanding of the social and economic constraints of potential management practices. Understanding this complexity, while taking strong steps to minimize current losses of species, is necessary for responsible management of Earth's ecosystems and the diverse biota they contain.
6,891 citations
Cites background from "Stability and Complexity in Model E..."
...In the former case, changing community composition is considered instability (May 1974); in the latter case, changing community composition is one mechanism that can help promote stability of ecosystem properties (McNaughton 1977, Tilman 1996, 1999, Lehman and Tilman 2000)....
[...]
Posted Content•
TL;DR: In this paper, a population ecology model applicable to business related organizational analyses is derived by compiling elements of several theories, including competition theory and niche theory, to address factors not encompassed by ecological theory.
Abstract: Factors impacting the organizational structure of firms have been analyzed often utilizing organizations theory. However, several other theories and perspectives have been proposed as potential alternative means of analyzing organizational structure and functioning. While previous studies regarding organizational structure have utilized such perspectives as adaptation and exchange theory, few studies have utilized population ecology theory, thus leading to the current study. Although population ecology theory is most often used in the biological sciences, many of its principles lend well to organizational analysis. Due to internal structural arrangements (e.g. information constraints, political constraints) and environmental pressures (e.g. legal and fiscal barriers, legitimacy) of an organization, the inflexibility of an organization limits the firm's organizational analysis utilizing an adaptation perspective. The challenges and discontinuities associated with utilizing an ecological perspective are identified, including issues related to the primary sources of change (selection and adaptive learning) and related to differentiating between selection and viability. Utilizing competition theory and niche theory, several models for analyzing organizational diversity are incorporated to address factors not encompassed by ecological theory. By compiling elements of several theories, a population ecology model applicable to business related organizational analyses is derived. (AKP)
6,537 citations
University of Texas at Austin1, University of California, Davis2, Florida State University3, University of Montpellier4, University of Chicago5, Washington University in St. Louis6, University of California, Berkeley7, University of Florida8, University of British Columbia9, University of York10, PSL Research University11, McGill University12
TL;DR: This framework is used to discuss why the metacommunity concept is useful in modifying existing ecological thinking and illustrate this with a number of both theoretical and empirical examples.
Abstract: The metacommunity concept is an important way to think about linkages between different spatial scales in ecology. Here we review current understanding about this concept. We first investigate issues related to its definition as a set of local communities that are linked by dispersal of multiple potentially interacting species. We then identify four paradigms for metacommunities: the patch-dynamic view, the species-sorting view, the mass effects view and the neutral view, that each emphasizes different processes of potential importance in metacommunities. These have somewhat distinct intellectual histories and we discuss elements related to their potential future synthesis. We then use this framework to discuss why the concept is useful in modifying existing ecological thinking and illustrate this with a number of both theoretical and empirical examples. As ecologists strive to understand increasingly complex mechanisms and strive to work across multiple scales of spatio-temporal organization, concepts like the metacommunity can provide important insights that frequently contrast with those that would be obtained with more conventional approaches based on local communities alone.
4,266 citations
Cites background from "Stability and Complexity in Model E..."
...May 1973; Pimm & Lawton 1978; McCann et al. 1998)....
[...]
...For example, in closed local communities, enhanced diversity is likely to lead to decreased stability of local communities and, potentially, of the ecosystems in which they occur (May 1973; Pimm & Lawton 1978)....
[...]
TL;DR: It is shown that when an individual dies, it may or may not be replaced by an individual of the same species, which is all‐important to the argument presented.
Abstract: SUMMARY
1According to ‘Gause's hypothesis’ a corollary of the process of evolution by natural selection is that in a community at equilibrium every species must occupy a different niche. Many botanists have found this idea improbable because they have ignored the processes of regeneration in plant communities.
2Most plant communities are longer-lived than their constituent individual plants. When an individual dies, it may or may not be replaced by an individual of the same species. It is this replacement stage which is all-important to the argument presented.
3Several mechanisms not involving regeneration also contribute to the maintenance of species-richness:
(a). differences in life-form coupled with the inability of larger plants to exhaust or cut off all resources, also the development of dependence-relationships,
(b) differences in phenology coupled with tolerance of suppression,
(c) fluctuations in the environment coupled with relatively small differences in competitive ability between many species,
(d) the ability of certain species-pairs to form stable mixtures because of a balance of intraspecific competition against interspecific competition,
(e) the production of substances more toxic to the producer-species than to the other species,
(f) differences in the primary limiting mineral nutrients or pore-sizes in the soil for neighbouring plants of different soecies, and
(g) differences in the competitive abilities of species dependent on their physiological age coupled with the uneven-age structure of many populations.
4The mechanisms listed above do not go far to explain the indefinite persistence in mixture of the many species in the most species-rich communities known.
5In contrast there seem to be almost limitless possibilities for differences between species in their requirements for regeneration, i.e. the replacement of the individual plants of one generation by those of the next. This idea is illustrated for tree species and it is emphasized that foresters were the first by a wide margin to appreciate its importance.
6The processes involved in the successful invasion of a gap by a given plant species and some characters of the gap that may be important are summarized in Table 2.
7The definition of a plant's niche requires recognition of four components:
(a) the habitat niche,
(b) the life-form niche,
(c) the phenological niche, and
(d) the regeneration niche.
8A brief account is given of the patterns of regeneration in different kinds of plant community to provide a background for studies of differentiation in the regeneration niche.
9All stages in the regeneration-cycle are potentially important and examples of differentiation between species are given for each of the following stages:
(a) Production of viable seed (including the sub-stages of flowering, pollination and seed-set),
(b) dispersal, in space and time,
(c) germination,
(d) establishment, and
(e) further development of the immature plant.
10In the concluding discussion emphasis is placed on the following themes:
(a) the kinds of work needed in future to prove or disprove that differentiation in the regeneration niche is the major explanation of the maintenance of species-richness in plant communities,
(b) the relation of the present thesis to published ideas on the origin of phenological spread,
(c) the relevance of the present thesis to the discussion on the presence of continua in vegetation,
(d) the co-incidence of the present thesis and the emerging ideas of evolutionists about differentiation of angiosperm taxa, and
(e) the importance of regeneration-studies for conservation.
4,057 citations