In modern coexistence theory, species coexistence can either arise via stabilizing mechanisms that increase niche differences or equalizing mechanisms that reduce fitness differences.Having a common currency for interpreting these mechanisms is essential for synthesizing knowledge across different studies and systems.Several methods for quantifying niche and fitness differences exist, but it remains unknown to what extent these methods agree on the reasons why species coexist. Here, we apply four common methods to quantify niche and fitness differences to one simulated and two empirical data sets. We ask if different methods result in different insights into what drives species coexistence. We find that different methods disagree on the effects of resource supply rates (simulated data), and of plant traits or phylogenetic distance (empirical data), on niche and fitness differences. More specifically, these methods often do not agree better than expected by chance. We argue for (1) a better understanding of what connects and sets apart different methods, and (2) the simultaneous application of multiple methods to enhance a more complete insight into why species coexist.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.