Metacommunities: Spatial Dynamics and Ecological Communities

By M. Hovenden, M. Holyoak, M. Leibold, Robert D. Holt. 2005

788 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/aeacd231af8f12daf41a400327b7bb0737654b7d

How researchers see this paper

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

1. T. Tscharntke
2. J. Tylianakis
3. R. Bommarco
4. S. Barot
5. Simon Ferrier
6. D. Kleijn
7. Y. Clough
8. T. Rand

Citations in the corpus

• The impact of neutrality, niche differentiation and species input on diversity and abundance distributions (2007, background): “(2004) and in the book of Holyoak et al. (2005). Another explanation for rarity is the theory of "tourist species": (Magurran and Henderson 2003, Ulrich and Ollik 2004, Ulrich and Zalewski 2006)”
• Eukaryotic plankton diversity in the sunlit ocean (2015, background): “This positive correlation between community dissimilarity and geographic distance, expected under neutral biodiversity dynamics (55), challenges the classical niche model for photic-zone eukaryotic plankton biogeography (56).”
• Biogeography of European land mammals shows environmentally distinct and spatially coherent clusters (2007, background): “Recent research in metacommunity structure and evolution (Leibold & Miller, 2004; Holyoak et al., 2005) shows promise for producing data at this scale.”
• Metacommunity organisation, spatial extent and dispersal in aquatic systems: patterns, processes and prospects (2015, unknown): “dominating in isolated or recently disturbed communities, while better competitors drive them to extinction in less-isolated or mature communities (Holyoak et al., 2005).”
• Effects of connectivity, dispersal directionality and functional traits on the metacommunity structure of river benthic diatoms (2013, background): “Metacommunity theory makes a variety of predictions about the spatial structure of biodiversity, depending on patterns of among-patch connectivity, environmental heterogeneity, and traits of species (Leibold et al., 2004; Holyoak et al., 2005).”
• Resource pulses, species interactions, and diversity maintenance in arid and semi-arid environments (2004, methodology): “Melbourne et al. (2004) and Huntly et al. (in review) give examples of integration over time and space using empirical data from field studies.”
• Pattern-formation approach to modelling spatially extended ecosystems (2012, unknown): “been devoted to the definition and quantification of landscape heterogeneity, to the identification and study of its drivers (Turner, 2005), and to the implications for community dynamics, ecosystem processes and ecosystem function (Holyoak et al., 2005; Loreau, 2010; Ritchie, 2010).”
• Contrasts between habitat generalists and specialists: an empirical extension to the basic metacommunity framework. (2009, background): “Based on the relative importance of the two processes, and some additional assumptions, four kinds of metacommunity models have been proposed: species sorting, mass effects, patch dynamics, and neutral (reviewed in Leibold and Miller 2004, Cottenie 2005, Holyoak et al. 2005).”
• River network properties shape α‐diversity and community similarity patterns of aquatic insect communities across major drainage basins (2013, background): “theoretical models and commonly observed in nature (Hanski & Gaggiotti, 2004; Holyoak et al., 2005).”