Heteromyopia and the spatial coexistence of similar competitors

By D. Murrell, R. Law. 2002

203 citations recorded by the source corpus.

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

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/345455a231657d436f5ddfed5a6a4f1a25ce3fda

How researchers see this paper

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

In Ecology

1. Jonathan M. Chase
2. Robin E. Snyder
3. P. Amarasekare
4. Charles D. Canham
5. M. Sankaran
6. Michael J. Papaik
7. J. Ratnam
8. Niall P. Hanan

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

1. Jonathan M. Chase
2. P. Amarasekare
3. Robin E. Snyder
4. Charles D. Canham
5. P. Chesson
6. M. Sankaran
7. Niall P. Hanan
8. J. Ratnam

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

1. P. Amarasekare
2. Jonathan M. Chase
3. Charles D. Canham
4. Robin E. Snyder
5. P. Chesson
6. Michael J. Papaik
7. M. Sankaran
8. Niall P. Hanan

Citations in the corpus

• Local dispersal can facilitate coexistence in the presence of permanent spatial heterogeneity (2003, background): “…most of them focus on the capacity of local interactions to generate aggregated population distributions in a uniform environment, so that competing species are segregated to some degree (Hassell et al. 1994; Comins & Hassell 1996; Durrett & Levin 1997; Kerr et al. 2002; Murrell & Law 2003).”
• Tree–grass coexistence in savannas revisited – insights from an examination of assumptions and mechanisms invoked in existing models (2004, background): “Significant progress on the issue of tree–grass coexistence may come from drawing on recent theoretical advances on spatial mechanisms of coexistence (Amarasekare 2003; Murrell & Law 2003; Snyder & Chesson 2003; Kneitel & Chase 2004).”
• Species resistance and community response to wind disturbance regimes in northern temperate forests (2006, result): “Our results support theories that suggest localized dispersal improves species coexistence (Chave et al. 2002) and delays competitive exclusion (Bolker & Pacala 1999; Murrell & Law 2003) (Fig.”
• Competitive coexistence in spatially structured environments: a synthesis (2003, background): “Coexistence via differences in the spatial scales of intra- vs. inter-specific competition is a relatively new idea (Murrell et al. 2002; Murrell & Law 2003 ), and empirical evidence of its operation in nature is yet to be obtained.”
• Towards a really unified theory for metacommunities (2005, background): “Zhang et al . 2004) or a result of differing dispersal probabilities and segregation if dispersal is localized ( Murrell & Law 2003 ).”