THE DIVERSITY–DISTURBANCE RELATIONSHIP: IS IT GENERALLY STRONG AND PEAKED?

By R. Mackey, D. Currie. 2001

605 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecological Modeling, Ecology, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/441e8cd4934447fd3949418d3a7caa7ff6ef2078

How researchers see this paper

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

In Ecological Modeling

In Ecology

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

Effects of grazing intensity on pollinator abundance and diversity, and on pollination services (2016, background): “Mackey & Currie (2000, 2001) questioned the validity of IDH because hump-shaped relationships do not seem to be the general response to stress, and when they occur, this response is weak.”
Deterministic control on community assembly peaks at intermediate levels of disturbance (2009, background): “Although recent evidence suggests that disturbance might have weak and inconsistent effects on local diversity ( Mackey and Currie 2001 ), effects at the meta-community scale, such as in this study, can be strong.”
Relationships Among Indices Suggest that Richness Is an Incomplete Surrogate for Grassland Biodiversity (2005, methodology): “It also is used as the only component of diversity in some tests of the intermediate-disturbance hypothesis (Huston 1994, Mackey and Currie 2001).”
Disturbance, productivity, and species diversity: empiricism vs. logic in ecological theory (2014, background): “…of the DEM less than a year after Connell’s IDH made it clear that the IDH was a special case that could only occur under specific conditions, most experimental and observational studies of the IDH have ignored the effects of productivity (e.g., Feminella and Hawkins 1995, Mackey and Currie 2001).”
Light, nutrients and grazing interact to determine diatom species richness via changes to productivity, nutrient state and grazer activity (2009, background): “…highest species richness at intermediate levels of disturbance, because organisms face a trade-off in their ability to compete for low levels of limiting resources and their ability to quickly use and colonize newly available resources and habitats (Connell 1978; Sousa 1984; Mackey & Currie 2001).”
Plant functional traits capture species richness variations along a flooding gradient (2011, background): “…relationship Despite vast theoretical and empirical literature, the effects of disturbance on biodiversity are still under debate (Shea et al. 2004), especially because different forms of diversitydisturbance patterns have been observed in natural communities (Mackey and Currie 2001).”
Species diversity, functional complexity and rarity in Arctic fjordic versus open shelf benthic systems (2012, background): “…species diversity, and a number of experimental treatments and in situ ecological studies have shown that a change of one of these 2 basic diversity components is not necessarily accompanied by a parallel change in the other (e.g. Wilsey & Potvin 2000, Mackey & Currie 2001, Stirling & Wilsey 2001).”
Predicting spatial patterns of plant species richness: a comparison of direct macroecological and species stacking modelling approaches (2011, background): “…factors such as unit size, resources available (Pausas & Austin, 2001; Hawkins et al., 2003; Michalet et al., 2006; Whittaker et al., 2007), environmental heterogeneity (Palmer & Dixon, 1990; Dufour et al., 2006) and disturbance levels (Connell, 1978; Huston, 1979; Mackey & Currie, 2000, 2001).”
Effects of disturbance on the diversity of hard-bottom macrobenthic communities on the coast of Chile (2005, background): “These results contrast with the low experimental support of the IDH reported in a recent review (Mackey & Currie 2001).”