首页> 外文期刊>Web Ecology >David and Goliath: comparative use of facilitation and competition studies in the plant ecology literature
【24h】

David and Goliath: comparative use of facilitation and competition studies in the plant ecology literature

机译:David和Goliath:植物生态学文献中促进和竞争研究的比较使用

获取原文
       

摘要

Competition and facilitation are extensively studied in plant ecology and are central to ecological theory. However, these processes do not occur in isolation from each other and should be studied concurrently and synthetically. Here, we compare the relative citation success of studies that focus on either side of the same interaction coin in terms of number of publications and citations per publication in six of the following major themes in plant ecology: biogeography, populations, communities, ecosystems, evolution and conservation. There were eight times more publications on plant competition than on facilitation but this is not surprising given its long history of comprehensive and relatively exclusive study in plant ecology. Although studies of facilitation comprised a smaller body of literature, the mean citation rate for each publication was equivalent to that of competition studies. Thus, facilitation studies are being used as much as competition. These patterns of use by the ecological community clearly indicate that both aspects of plant interactions address broad themes and that studies on plant interactions should now strive to either test both simultaneously or at the very minimum include interpretations and relevant literature from both sets of ideas. Importantly, these broad trends illustrate the old axiom that quality and not quantity of studies may be a consideration in the success of a sub-discipline.
机译:竞争和促进在植物生态学中得到了广泛的研究,是生态学理论的核心。但是,这些过程并不是彼此孤立地发生的,应该同时进行综合研究。在这里,我们比较了在植物生态学的以下六个主要主题中,侧重于同一交互币两侧的研究的相对引用成功率:出版物数量和每个出版物的引用率:生物地理学,种群,群落,生态系统,进化和保护。关于植物竞争的出版物比促进研究的出版物多八倍,但这不足为奇,因为它在植物生态学方面进行了全面而相对专门的研究已有很长的历史。尽管促进研究的文献较少,但每本出版物的平均引用率均与竞争研究相当。因此,便利化研究与竞争一样被广泛使用。生态社区的这些使用模式清楚地表明,植物相互作用的两个方面都涉及广泛的主题,而植物相互作用的研究现在应努力同时或至少检验两种观点的解释和相关文献。重要的是,这些广泛的趋势说明了古老的公理,即研究质量而不是研究数量可能是子学科成功的考虑因素。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号