Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32672410›Full record

ArticleEcology letters2020

A process-based metacommunity framework linking local and regional scale community ecology.

Patrick L Thompson, Laura Melissa Guzman, Luc De Meester, Zsófia Horváth, Robert Ptacnik, Bram Vanschoenwinkel, Duarte S Viana, Jonathan M Chase

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology letters, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
68citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

68 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The island biology of the host microbiome.Trends in microbiology · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

8 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Patrick L ThompsonDepartment of Zoology & Biodiversity Research Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5278-9045
Laura Melissa GuzmanDepartment of Zoology & Biodiversity Research Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2198-9738
Luc De MeesterLaboratory of Aquatic Ecology, Evolution and Conservation, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5433-6843
Zsófia HorváthLaboratory of Aquatic Ecology, Evolution and Conservation, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2857-1094
Robert PtacnikWasserCluster Lunz - Biologische Station, Lunz am See, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7176-7653
Bram VanschoenwinkelDepartment of Biology, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Biology, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8973-6297
Duarte S VianaGerman Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv), Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7864-0871
Jonathan M ChaseGerman Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv), Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5580-4303

Funding

Alexander von Humboldt-StiftungDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft FZT 118European Regional Development FundFonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek G0B9818GINOP 2.3.2.-15-2016-00057Killam TrustsKU Leuven C16/2017/002Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaÖsterreichische Forschungsgemeinschaft 06/15539University of British ColumbiaVogelwarte - Madárvárta 2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The metacommunity concept has the potential to integrate local and regional dynamics within a general community ecology framework. To this end, the concept must move beyond the discrete archetypes that have largely defined it (e.g. neutral vs. species sorting) and better incorporate local scale species interactions and coexistence mechanisms. Here, we present a fundamental reconception of the framework that explicitly links local coexistence theory to the spatial processes inherent to metacommunity theory, allowing for a continuous range of competitive community dynamics. These dynamics emerge from the three underlying processes that shape ecological communities: (1) density-independent responses to abiotic conditions, (2) density-dependent biotic interactions and (3) dispersal. Stochasticity is incorporated in the demographic realisation of each of these processes. We formalise this framework using a simulation model that explores a wide range of competitive metacommunity dynamics by varying the strength of the underlying processes. Using this model and framework, we show how existing theories, including the traditional metacommunity archetypes, are linked by this common set of processes. We then use the model to generate new hypotheses about how the three processes combine to interactively shape diversity, functioning and stability within metacommunities.

Indexed as

EcosystemModels, BiologicalBiotaEcologyPopulation DynamicsAbiotic nichecoexistencecompetitiondispersaldiversityenvironmental changefunctioningstabilitytemporal

Identifiers

PMID32672410
PMCPMC7496463

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.