ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2024
A tiny fraction of all species forms most of nature: Rarity as a sticky state.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global relationships between body size and urban affinity across more than 30,000 plant and animal species.eLife · 2026Article
- Spatial Complexity and Rare-Taxon Turnover Structures Benthic Coral Reef eDNA Communities.Molecular ecology · 2026Article
- Niche Overlap Is Not Enough: Same Overlap, Contrasting Fluctuations.Ecology letters · 2026Article
- Fluctuating Growth Rates Link Turnover and Unevenness in Species-Rich Communities.Ecology letters · 2026Article
- Microbes Under Climate Refugia: Equable Subcommunity Rank Dynamics in Large-River Deltaic Estuaries.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Article
- Spinach seed microbiome characteristics linked to suppressiveness against Globisporangium ultimum damping-off.FEMS microbiology ecology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Using data from a wide range of natural communities including the human microbiome, plants, fish, mushrooms, rodents, beetles, and trees, we show that universally just a few percent of the species account for most of the biomass. This is in line with the classical observation that the vast bulk of biodiversity is very rare. Attempts to find traits allowing the tiny fraction of abundant species to escape rarity have remained unsuccessful. Here, we argue that this might be explained by the fact that hyper-dominance can emerge through stochastic processes. We demonstrate that in neutrally competing groups of species, rarity tends to become a trap if environmental fluctuations result in gains and losses proportional to abundances. This counter-intuitive phenomenon arises because absolute change tends to zero for very small abundances, causing rarity to become a "sticky state", a pseudoattractor that can be revealed numerically in classical ball-in-cup landscapes. As a result, the vast majority of species spend most of their time in rarity leaving space for just a few others to dominate the neutral community. However, fates remain stochastic. Provided that there is some response diversity, roles occasionally shift as stochastic events or natural enemies bring an abundant species down allowing a rare species to rise to dominance. Microbial time series spanning thousands of generations support this prediction. Our results suggest that near-neutrality within niches may allow numerous rare species to persist in the wings of the dominant ones. Stand-ins may serve as insurance when former key species collapse.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.