Indirect effects between shared prey: Predictions for

By Jason P. Harmon, D. Andow. BioControl (Dordrecht), 2004

83 citations recorded by the source corpus.

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

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d46696bd037ae28302261c461ab2295135ce5ca8

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. Mark Hebblewhite
2. Marco Musiani
3. H. Robinson
4. N. DeCesare
5. M. Boyce
6. Evelyn H. Merrill

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

1. A. Janssen
2. G. Messelink
3. M. Sabelis
4. Mark Hebblewhite
5. H. Robinson
6. N. DeCesare
7. Marco Musiani
8. K. Bolckmans

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

1. Mark Hebblewhite
2. H. Robinson
3. N. DeCesare
4. Marco Musiani
5. M. Boyce

Citations in the corpus

• Endangered, apparently: the role of apparent competition in endangered species conservation (2009, background): “…(Pope et al., 2008), indirect amensalism (Garrott et al., 2009), incidental predation (Schmidt, 2004), subsidized predation (Gompper & Vanak, 2008) and target predation (Harmon & Andow, 2004) all emphasize the role of indirect community interactions consistent with apparent competition.”
• Biological control of thrips and whiteflies by a shared predator: Two pests are better than one (2008, background): “Apparent mutualism occurs mostly at a shorter time scale than apparent competition (Harmon and Andow 2004; van Veen et al., 2006).”
• Pest species diversity enhances control of spider mites and whiteflies by a generalist phytoseiid predator (2010, background): “However, indirect interactions occurring among various pest species may enhance biological control (Janssen et al. 1998; Harmon and Andow 2004; Prasad and Snyder 2006; Van Veen et al. 2006).”