The monophyly of island radiations: An evaluation of niche pre-emption and some alternative explanations
Journal of Ecology, ISSN: 0022-0477, Vol: 93, Issue: 4, Page: 653-657
2005
- 72Citations
- 155Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Review Description
1 It has been argued that niche pre-emption is not the only possible explanation for monophyly among Macaronesian endemic plants because (i) interspecific competition is diffuse, not species-specific, (ii) the radiations in question may not in fact be monophyletic, and (iii) later colonists may have hybridized with earlier ones, making a small and undetected contribution to the gene pool of lineages that appear to be monophyletic. 2 The niche pre-emption mechanism does not, however, require species-specific competitive interactions. It merely proposes that the clade created by adaptive radiation will occupy more niche space than the original colonist could on its own. Members of the clade will then collectively inhibit establishment by new colonists more effectively than can a colonist that has not radiated. 3 The monophyly of many larger radiations in the Macaronesian flora is well established and new studies tend to confirm this pattern. 4 A few later-arriving colonists may have undetectably hybridized with earlier arrivals, but this is only a genetic interpretation of the essential idea behind pre-emption, i.e. that early arrivals so outnumber later colonists that the latter cannot establish. 5 We do not therefore believe that hybridization provides an alternative explanation of why groups with multiple colonization failed to radiate in Macaronesia. © 2005 British Ecological Society.
Bibliographic Details
Wiley
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know