Biodiversity and ecosystem function: the consumer connection

By M. ScholarWorks, J. Duffy. 2002

660 citations recorded by the source corpus.

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

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/cb6275ecd71bbf47cab8d500b739902785a86133

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

Consumer effects decline with prey diversity (2004, background): “This is despite the fact that prey diversity might be expected to decrease the effectiveness of trophic interactions via several plausible mechanisms (Duffy 2002).”
Ecosystem consequences of diversity depend on food chain length in estuarine vegetation (2005, background): “In the context of such multi-trophic level systems, diversity is potentially important in two ways (Duffy 2002).”
A synthesis of subdisciplines: predator–prey interactions, and biodiversity and ecosystem functioning (2004, background): “While BEF has not developed in strict isolation from PPI (Wilby & Thomas 2002; Cardinale et al. 2003; Chalcraft & Resetarits 2003), the two research areas clearly have distinct histories and different emphases (Duffy 2002).”
Marine biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: what’s known and what’s next? (2015, background): “Indeed, marine studies have been instrumental in shifting the focus towards higher trophic levels, specifically looking at herbivory and predation (Duffy 2002, Duffy et al. 2003, Bruno and O’Connor 2005, O’Connor and Crowe 2005, Stachowicz et al. 2007, Gamfeldt and Hillebrand 2008), and how these…”
Nematodes as soil indicators: functional and biodiversity aspects (2003, background): “It is also apparent that, at the functional group level, there are subtle differences among species that are manifest only under altered conditions or over long time periods (Yeates et al. 1999; Duffy 2002).”
Detritus processing, ecosystem engineering and benthic diversity: a test of predator–omnivore interference (2004, background): “This pattern implies that consumers sometimes influence ecosystem processes disproportionately to their abundance (Duffy 2002), although the impact of a species in an ecosystem is a function of both per capita effects and abundance (Rosenfeld 2002).”
Interaction strengths in food webs: issues and opportunities (2004, background): “Additionally, not only stability but also ecosystem functions might be strongly mediated by the arrangement of interaction strengths (Mikola & Setälä 1998; Duffy 2002; Montoya et al .”
Capturing the cornerstones of coral reef resilience: linking theory to practice (2008, methodology): “Hence, defining functional groups is a non-trivial and sometimes controversial task (see review by Duffy 2002 ), although more quantitative methods have been explored (e.g., Petchey and Gaston 2002).”
Biodiversity-Ecosystem Function Research: Is It Relevant to Conservation? (2005, background): “That is, species richness is inversely related to trophic level (Duffy 2002, Petchey et al. 2004a, Vinebrooke et al. 2003).”
Relative effects of grazers and nutrients on seagrasses: a meta-analysis approach (2004, background): “Theoretical and empirical research has demonstrated that complexities such as age-structured omnivory, intraguild predation and anti-consumer defenses can diminish the effects of strong ‘top-down’ forces or trophic cascades (Strong 1992, Polis & Strong 1996, Duffy 2002).”
Regime Shifts, Resilience, and Biodiversity in Ecosystem Management (2004, background): “Loss of a major functional group, such as apex predators, other consumers, or benthic filter-feeders, may, as previously discussed, cause drastic alterations in ecosystem functioning (Chapin et al. 1997, Duffy 2002, Jackson et al. 2001).”