Are communities saturated? On the relationship between α, β and γ diversity

By Michel Loreau. 2000

479 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/18b1573c668894490f64842a6261100009750078

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

Defining invasiveness and invasibility in ecological networks (2016, background): “Very few, if any, ecological networks are truly saturated, as local communities can be strongly affected by regional species dynamics and stochasticity (Abrams 1998; Loreau 2000); rather the concept of community saturation serves as a theoretical benchmark by which invasibility can be measured.”
Coexistence, saturation and invasion resistance in simulated plant assemblages (2001, background): “Many of these coexistence mechanisms do not lead to saturated communities or assemblages; indeed in many of the models there are no theoretical limits to species richness (Cornell and Lawton 1992, Tilman 1999, Loreau 2000).”
Biodiversity of a continental shelf soft-sediment macrobenthos community (2001, unknown): “Since β diversity is γ divided by α (Whittaker 1960) or alternatively γ minus α (Loreau 2000) we also need γ diversity.”
Navigating the multiple meanings of β diversity: a roadmap for the practicing ecologist. (2011, background): “The intrinsic relationship between b and a diversity, including dependence on scale and sample size (Loreau 2000), has also prompted a variety of proposed corrections to classical b diversity measures (e.g. Harrison et al. 1992; Chao et al. 2005; Chase 2007; Vellend et al. 2007).”
The role of forest structure, fragment size and corridors in maintaining small mammal abundance and diversity in an Atlantic forest landscape (2005, background): “…size and thus increasing the influence of stochastic processes, habitat loss and fragmentation should increase extinction rates, leading to a decrease in alpha diversity in remnants (Wilcox and Murphy, 1985) and an increase in beta diversity among them (Harrison, 1997; Loreau, 2000; Chase, 2003).”
Partitioning the diversity of riverine fish: The roles of habitat types and non-native species (2007, methodology): “…compilation 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Freshwater Biology, 52, 1400–1415 I used the recently proposed approach of additive partitioning (e.g. Loreau, 2000; Wagner et al., 2000; Veech et al., 2002; Gering et al., 2003; Stendera & Johnson, 2005) to examine the contribution of running water…”
The additive partitioning of species diversity: recent revival of an old idea (2002, background): “Ecologists, both theoretical and empirical, should begin to use diversity partitioning as a conceptual framework and an analytic method to address questions pertaining to the relationship between local and regional species diversity (Loreau 2000, Godfray and Lawton 2001).”
Assessing the impact of Impatiens glandulifera on riparian habitats: partitioning diversity components following species removal (2005, background): “The concepts of α , β , γ diversity are based on consideration of the spatial scales at which different processes might dominate, but there is no prescription in ecology on how to define the local and regional communities (Loreau 2000).”
Predicting spatial patterns of plant species richness: a comparison of direct macroecological and species stacking modelling approaches (2011, background): “In such communities, the set of species actually occurring at a given site is sorted from a larger habitat species pool, as determined by neutral processes and/or biotic assembly rules (Cornell & Lawton, 1992; Loreau, 2000).”
The role of habitat connectivity and landscape geometry in experimental zooplankton metacommunities (2002, background): “Because regional diversity is the product of local diversity and the measure of inter-patch differences in species composition (also known as beta diversity [Whittaker 1972], see also Loreau 2000 ), increasing connectivity in systems containing high habitat heterogeneity can lead to the homogenizat”
Biotic homogenization: a new research agenda for conservation biogeography (2006, background): “For instance, recent studies have explored the relationship between the various components of biodiversity (Loreau, 2000) and between the various measures of b-diversity (Koleff et al., 2003), but we still have much to learn about the relationship between changes in species richness and community…”
SESAM – a new framework integrating macroecological and species distribution models for predicting spatio‐temporal patterns of species assemblages (2011, background): “…the number of species that can theoretically co-occur in a given unit based on the space and/or resources available (often interpreted as a rough expression of the environmental carrying capacity of a unit, determining the level of community saturation; Loreau, 2000; see also Currie et al., 2004).”
From communities to continents: beta diversity of herbivorous insects (2005, background): “As recently argued by Loreau (2000), Gering and Crist (2002) and Veech et al. (2002), the additive partitioning of gamma diversity g = aavg + b is more practical as all three parameters, including beta diversity, can be measured in the same unit, the number of species.”
Measuring beta diversity for presence–absence data (2003, background): “alpha, beta and gamma diversity measures, while acknowledging that recent discussion of the latter addresses a potentially exciting avenue of investigation (Lande 1996; Loreau 2000; Veech et al . 2002).”