跳到主要导航 跳到搜索 跳到主要内容

The case for ecological neutral theory

  • James Rosindell*
  • , Stephen P. Hubbell
  • , Fangliang He
  • , Luke J. Harmon
  • , Rampal S. Etienne
  • *此作品的通讯作者
  • University of Leeds
  • University of Idaho
  • Imperial College London
  • University of California at Los Angeles
  • Smithsonian Institution
  • University of Alberta
  • Sun Yat-Sen University
  • University of Groningen

科研成果: 期刊稿件文献综述同行评审

摘要

Ecological neutral theory has elicited strong opinions in recent years. Here, we review these opinions and strip away some unfortunate problems with semantics to reveal three major underlying questions. Only one of these relates to neutral theory and the importance of ecological drift, whereas the others involve the link between pattern and process, the tradeoff between simplicity and complexity in modeling, and the role of stochasticity and drift in ecology. We explain how neutral theory cannot be simultaneously used both as a null hypothesis and as an approximation. However, we also show how neutral theory always has a valuable use in one of these two roles, even though the real world is not neutral.

源语言英语
页(从-至)203-208
页数6
期刊Trends in Ecology and Evolution
27
4
DOI
出版状态已出版 - 4月 2012
已对外发布

指纹

探究 'The case for ecological neutral theory' 的科研主题。它们共同构成独一无二的指纹。

引用此