Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBlonder, Benjamin
dc.contributor.authorSloat, Lindsey
dc.contributor.authorEnquist, Brian J.
dc.contributor.authorMcGill, Brian
dc.date.accessioned2016-11-10T04:59:00Z
dc.date.available2016-11-10T04:59:00Z
dc.date.issued2014-11-10
dc.identifier.citationSeparating Macroecological Pattern and Process: Comparing Ecological, Economic, and Geological Systems 2014, 9 (11):e112850 PLoS ONEen
dc.identifier.issn1932-6203
dc.identifier.doi10.1371/journal.pone.0112850
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/621335
dc.descriptionUA Open Access Publishing Funden
dc.description.abstractTheories of biodiversity rest on several macroecological patterns describing the relationship between species abundance and diversity. A central problem is that all theories make similar predictions for these patterns despite disparate assumptions. A troubling implication is that these patterns may not reflect anything unique about organizational principles of biology or the functioning of ecological systems. To test this, we analyze five datasets from ecological, economic, and geological systems that describe the distribution of objects across categories in the United States. At the level of functional form (‘first-order effects’), these patterns are not unique to ecological systems, indicating they may reveal little about biological process. However, we show that mechanism can be better revealed in the scale-dependency of first-order patterns (‘second-order effects’). These results provide a roadmap for biodiversity theory to move beyond traditional patterns, and also suggest ways in which macroecological theory can constrain the dynamics of economic systems.
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherPublic Library of Scienceen
dc.relation.urlhttp://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0112850en
dc.rights© 2014 Blonder et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.en
dc.titleSeparating Macroecological Pattern and Process: Comparing Ecological, Economic, and Geological Systemsen
dc.typeArticleen
dc.contributor.departmentSky School, University of Arizonaen
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Arizonaen
dc.identifier.journalPLoS ONEen
dc.description.noteOpen access journalen
dc.description.collectioninformationThis item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.en
dc.eprint.versionFinal published versionen
refterms.dateFOA2018-09-11T15:38:15Z
html.description.abstractTheories of biodiversity rest on several macroecological patterns describing the relationship between species abundance and diversity. A central problem is that all theories make similar predictions for these patterns despite disparate assumptions. A troubling implication is that these patterns may not reflect anything unique about organizational principles of biology or the functioning of ecological systems. To test this, we analyze five datasets from ecological, economic, and geological systems that describe the distribution of objects across categories in the United States. At the level of functional form (‘first-order effects’), these patterns are not unique to ecological systems, indicating they may reveal little about biological process. However, we show that mechanism can be better revealed in the scale-dependency of first-order patterns (‘second-order effects’). These results provide a roadmap for biodiversity theory to move beyond traditional patterns, and also suggest ways in which macroecological theory can constrain the dynamics of economic systems.


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
journal.pone.0112850.PDF
Size:
684.9Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Final Published Version

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record