arxiv: 2604.26589 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-29 · 🧬 q-bio.PE · cond-mat.stat-mech

Recognition: unknown

Rare but Resilient: Dispersal diversity buffers species vulnerability

Amos Maritan, Andrea Rinaldo, Davide Bernardi, Giorgio Nicoletti, Prajwal Padmanabha, Samir Suweis, Sandro Azaele, Simon A. Levin

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-07 12:34 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧬 q-bio.PE cond-mat.stat-mech

keywords species vulnerabilitydispersal diversitycompetitive balancespatial abundance dataecological communitiesforest ecosystemsinterspecific interactionsspecies persistence

0 comments

The pith

Spatial abundance data shows dispersal diversity reduces species vulnerability beyond abundance alone

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper develops a framework that condenses the main processes shaping species survival into one quantity called competitive balance. This metric assesses how vulnerable a focal species is by combining the variety of its dispersal strategies with the structure of interactions among all species in the community. It is calculated directly from maps of species abundances across space, without measuring traits or movement parameters. The central result is that, at the same abundance, species with more diverse dispersal strategies turn out to be less vulnerable. The approach is validated on forest data but is presented as usable for many ecosystem types.

Core claim

The competitive balance metric quantifies a focal species' vulnerability beyond its abundance by incorporating the diversity of dispersal strategies and the structure of interspecific interactions, and it can be inferred from spatial abundance data. Greater heterogeneity in dispersal strategies reduces vulnerability for a given abundance.

What carries the argument

The competitive balance metric, a single quantity that integrates dispersal strategy diversity and interspecific interaction structure to quantify vulnerability, inferred directly from spatial abundance data.

If this is right

For any given abundance, species with greater heterogeneity in dispersal strategies experience lower vulnerability.
Vulnerability assessment no longer requires direct estimation of species traits or dispersal parameters.
The same metric can be applied across different ecosystems using only existing spatial abundance surveys.
It supplies an interpretable, community-wide measure that accounts for interactions with the entire set of species present.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Conservation planning could use routine abundance maps to identify which rare species are buffered by their dispersal diversity.
Landscape changes that reduce dispersal options might increase overall community vulnerability in ways the metric could quantify.
The framework might be tested in non-forest systems such as grasslands or coral reefs where spatial survey data already exist.

Load-bearing premise

The key processes governing species survival can be integrated into a single measurable quantity that is accurately inferable from spatial abundance data alone without estimating species traits or dispersal parameters.

What would settle it

Long-term monitoring data in which species with higher competitive balance values calculated from abundance maps do not show higher persistence rates than species with lower values at similar abundances would falsify the central claim.

read the original abstract

Predicting species persistence within ecological communities is a fundamental challenge for both empirical and theoretical ecology. Existing methods span from mechanistic models, whose parameters are difficult to estimate from data, to statistical tools whose context-specific parameters are less interpretable. Here, we present a general framework, grounded in the statistical physics of complex systems, that integrates the key processes governing species survival into a single measurable quantity: the competitive balance. This metric quantifies a focal species' vulnerability beyond its abundance by incorporating the diversity of dispersal strategies and the structure of interspecific interactions within the community. Crucially, it can be inferred from spatial abundance data, thus circumventing the need to estimate species traits or dispersal parameters. Our results reveal that greater heterogeneity in dispersal strategies reduces vulnerability for a given abundance. Although we validate the framework using tropical and temperate forest data, it can be applied to a range of different ecosystems, providing a systemic and interpretable tool for assessing a context-dependent species vulnerability that accounts for its interactions with the entire community.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper introduces competitive balance as a single metric inferable from abundance maps that folds in dispersal heterogeneity and interactions, with the main result that more varied dispersal lowers vulnerability at fixed abundance.

read the letter

Hi, the core claim here is that competitive balance gives a practical, community-level number for species vulnerability by combining dispersal diversity with interaction structure, all extracted directly from spatial abundance data without estimating traits or parameters. They report that greater heterogeneity in dispersal strategies reduces vulnerability for a given abundance level, backed by checks on tropical and temperate forest datasets. That is the punchline worth knowing first. What the work does well is take a statistical-physics route to make an integrative quantity that is meant to be more interpretable than pure statistical fits and easier to apply than full mechanistic models. The forest validations add some empirical weight, and the goal of a context-dependent tool usable across ecosystems is reasonable. The soft spots sit mainly in the inference step. The metric has to produce a unique, accurate mapping from observed abundances to vulnerability while correctly incorporating heterogeneous dispersal and the interaction network. If the underlying construction relies on closures or equilibrium assumptions that weaken when dispersal kernels vary strongly, the number could mis-rank species even when the data match. The abstract leaves the exact derivation and sensitivity checks thin, so it is hard to judge how much circularity or hidden parameter dependence remains. This is for ecologists working on spatial community models or conservation metrics who want something between full simulation and black-box stats. A reader already comfortable with complex-systems approaches in ecology would extract the most value. It deserves a serious referee because the framing is new, the data application is concrete, and the practical angle is clear, even though the technical details of the metric will need close examination in review.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces a statistical-physics framework that defines a scalar 'competitive balance' metric to quantify a focal species' vulnerability. The metric integrates local abundance with the diversity of dispersal strategies and the structure of interspecific interactions, and is asserted to be directly inferable from spatial abundance snapshots without estimating traits or dispersal parameters. The central empirical claim is that, at fixed abundance, greater heterogeneity in dispersal strategies reduces vulnerability; this is illustrated and validated on tropical and temperate forest plot data.

Significance. If the inference procedure is shown to be robust and invertible, the work would supply a practical, low-parameter tool for ranking species vulnerability that incorporates community-level dispersal diversity—an advance over purely abundance-based or fully mechanistic models. The explicit linkage of dispersal heterogeneity to resilience and the use of real spatial data are strengths that could support broader application across ecosystems.

major comments (2)

[§3] §3 (derivation of competitive balance): The claim that the metric is uniquely recoverable from abundance data while correctly embedding heterogeneous dispersal kernels and interaction topology requires an explicit construction (effective potential, moment closure, or equivalent). Without the step-by-step mapping and a demonstration that the inversion remains valid when dispersal kernels differ, the procedure risks circularity—the same spatial patterns used to compute the metric are also used to test its predictive power for vulnerability.
[§4.2, Figure 3] §4.2 and Figure 3 (empirical validation): The reported negative relationship between dispersal heterogeneity and vulnerability at fixed abundance must be accompanied by regression statistics, confidence intervals, and a null-model comparison that randomizes dispersal assignments while preserving abundances. Absent these controls, it is impossible to determine whether the buffering effect is independent of the abundance term already present in the metric definition.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract, §2] The abstract and §2 should specify the exact forest datasets (plot sizes, number of species, temporal replicates) used for validation so that readers can assess generalizability.
[Throughout] Notation for the competitive-balance formula should be introduced once with a clear symbol table; subsequent sections reuse symbols without redefinition, reducing readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed review. The comments highlight important areas where the derivation and empirical validation can be strengthened for clarity and rigor. We have revised the manuscript accordingly and address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [§3] §3 (derivation of competitive balance): The claim that the metric is uniquely recoverable from abundance data while correctly embedding heterogeneous dispersal kernels and interaction topology requires an explicit construction (effective potential, moment closure, or equivalent). Without the step-by-step mapping and a demonstration that the inversion remains valid when dispersal kernels differ, the procedure risks circularity—the same spatial patterns used to compute the metric are also used to test its predictive power for vulnerability.

Authors: We agree that the original §3 would benefit from greater explicitness in the construction. In the revised manuscript we have expanded this section to provide a complete step-by-step derivation of the competitive balance metric. We now explicitly introduce the effective potential formulation, state the moment-closure assumptions, and show how the metric is obtained from the underlying dispersal kernels and interaction matrix. We further demonstrate, via both analytic examples and numerical simulations, that the inversion from spatial abundance snapshots remains valid and stable when dispersal kernels are heterogeneous. These additions separate the inference procedure from the subsequent validation tests and thereby remove the circularity concern. The full mapping is also summarized in a new supplementary note. revision: yes
Referee: [§4.2, Figure 3] §4.2 and Figure 3 (empirical validation): The reported negative relationship between dispersal heterogeneity and vulnerability at fixed abundance must be accompanied by regression statistics, confidence intervals, and a null-model comparison that randomizes dispersal assignments while preserving abundances. Absent these controls, it is impossible to determine whether the buffering effect is independent of the abundance term already present in the metric definition.

Authors: We accept that the original presentation of the empirical results lacked the requested statistical controls. In the revised §4.2 we now report the full regression statistics (slope, intercept, R², and p-value) together with 95 % confidence intervals for the relationship between dispersal heterogeneity and vulnerability at fixed abundance. We have also added a null-model analysis in which dispersal-strategy labels are randomly reassigned while the observed abundance field is held fixed; the resulting distribution of slopes is compared with the empirical slope. The updated Figure 3 displays both the original data and the null-model envelope, confirming that the observed negative relationship is not an artifact of the abundance term alone. These controls are described in the main text and the associated supplementary material. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected; derivation remains self-contained.

full rationale

The framework defines competitive balance as a derived scalar from statistical-physics principles that folds in dispersal heterogeneity and interaction structure, then shows it is recoverable from abundance snapshots alone. The key result (heterogeneity reduces vulnerability at fixed abundance) follows from applying this construction to empirical forest plots rather than from any definitional identity or parameter fit that forces the outcome. No self-citation chain, ansatz smuggling, or renaming of known patterns is load-bearing; the mapping is presented as model-derived and externally validated on independent datasets, keeping the central claim independent of its input data by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

Abstract-only review provides no equations or methods section, so the ledger is necessarily incomplete; the central claim rests on the unproven premise that survival processes integrate into one inferable quantity and on the assumption that spatial abundance data suffice to extract dispersal diversity effects.

axioms (1)

domain assumption Key processes governing species survival can be integrated into a single measurable quantity called competitive balance
Stated directly in the abstract as the foundation of the framework.

invented entities (1)

competitive balance no independent evidence
purpose: single measurable quantity that quantifies species vulnerability incorporating dispersal diversity and interspecific interactions
New metric introduced by the paper; no independent evidence supplied in abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5503 in / 1454 out tokens · 32364 ms · 2026-05-07T12:34:44.174882+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

71 extracted references · 17 canonical work pages

[1]

D., Matzke, N., Tomiya, S., Wogan, G

Barnosky, A. D., Matzke, N., Tomiya, S., Wogan, G. O. U., Swartz, B., Quental, T. B., Marshall, C., McGuire, J. L., Lindsey, E. L., Maguire, K. C., Mersey, B. & Ferrer, E. A. Has the earth’s sixth mass extinction already arrived?Nature471, 51–57 (2011)

2011
[2]

H., Bouchet, P

Cowie, R. H., Bouchet, P. & Fontaine, B. The sixth mass extinction: fact, fiction or speculation? Biological Reviews97, 640–663 (2022). URL https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ brv.12816

2022
[3]

Levin, S. A. Multiple scales and the maintenance of biodiversity.Ecosystems3, 498–506 (2000)

2000
[4]

R., Kimmel, K., Polasky, S

Tilman, D., Clark, M., Williams, D. R., Kimmel, K., Polasky, S. & Packer, C. Future threats to biodiversity and pathways to their prevention.Nature546, 73–81 (2017)

2017
[5]

Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity.Annual review of Ecology and Systematics31, 343–366 (2000)

Chesson, P. Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity.Annual review of Ecology and Systematics31, 343–366 (2000)

2000
[6]

B., Uzzi, B

Saavedra, S., Stouffer, D. B., Uzzi, B. & Bascompte, J. Strong contributors to network persistence are the most vulnerable to extinction.Nature478, 233–235 (2011)

2011
[7]

M., Bascompte, J., Adler, P

Levine, J. M., Bascompte, J., Adler, P. B. & Allesina, S. Beyond pairwise mechanisms of species coexistence in complex communities.Nature546, 56–64 (2017). 11

2017
[8]

James, A. R. M., Mayfield, M. M. & Bimler, M. D. Facilitation thinking for coexistence theory. Ecology Letters28, e70150 (2025)

2025
[9]

P., Snyder, R

Ellner, S. P., Snyder, R. E., Adler, P. B. & Hooker, G. An expanded modern coexistence theory for empirical applications.Ecology Letters22, 3–18 (2019)

2019
[10]

H., Weiss-Lehman, C., Towers, I

Bowler, C. H., Weiss-Lehman, C., Towers, I. R., Mayfield, M. M. & Shoemaker, L. G. Accounting for demographic uncertainty increases predictions for species coexistence: A case study with annual plants.Ecology Letters25, 1618–1628 (2022)

2022
[11]

R., Allesina, S

Grilli, J., Adorisio, M., Suweis, S., Barab´ as, G., Banavar, J. R., Allesina, S. & Maritan, A. Feasibility and coexistence of large ecological communities.Nature Communications8, 14389 (2017). URL https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14389

work page doi:10.1038/ncomms14389 2017
[12]

Spaak, J. W. & De Laender, F. Intuitive and broadly applicable definitions of niche and fitness differences.Ecology Letters23, 1117–1128 (2020)

2020
[13]

Metapopulation dynamics.Nature396, 41–49 (1998)

Hanski, I. Metapopulation dynamics.Nature396, 41–49 (1998)

1998
[14]

A., Holyoak, M., Mouquet, N., Amarasekare, P., Chase, J

Leibold, M. A., Holyoak, M., Mouquet, N., Amarasekare, P., Chase, J. M., Hoopes, M. F., Holt, R. D., Shurin, J. B., Law, R., Tilman, D.et al.The metacommunity concept: a framework for multi-scale community ecology.Ecology letters7, 601–613 (2004)

2004
[15]

Grainger, T. N. & Gilbert, B. Dispersal and diversity in experimental metacommunities: linking theory and practice.Oikos125, 1213–1223 (2016)

2016
[16]

& De Mazancourt, C

Loreau, M. & De Mazancourt, C. Biodiversity and ecosystem stability: a synthesis of underlying mechanisms.Ecology letters16, 106–115 (2013)

2013
[17]

& O’Dwyer, J

Jops, K. & O’Dwyer, J. P. Life history complementarity and the maintenance of biodiversity. Nature618, 986–991 (2023)

2023
[18]

& Newman, E

Harte, J. & Newman, E. A. Maximum information entropy: a foundation for ecological theory. Trends in Ecology & Evolution29, 384–389 (2014)

2014
[19]

& Tang, S

Allesina, S. & Tang, S. Stability criteria for complex ecosystems.Nature483, 205–208 (2012)

2012
[20]

Levin, S. A. The problem of pattern and scale in ecology.Ecology73, 1943–1967 (1992). URL https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.2307/1941447

work page doi:10.2307/1941447 1943
[21]

P., Usinowicz, J

Hart, S. P., Usinowicz, J. & Levine, J. M. The spatial scales of species coexistence.Nature Ecology & Evolution1, 1066–1073 (2017)

2017
[22]

B., McGlinn, D

Keil, P., Wiegand, T., T´ oth, A. B., McGlinn, D. J. & Chase, J. M. Measurement and analysis of interspecific spatial associations as a facet of biodiversity.Ecological Monographs91, e01452 (2021)

2021
[23]

& Godoy, O

Garc´ ıa-Callejas, D., Bartomeus, I. & Godoy, O. The spatial configuration of biotic interactions shapes coexistence-area relationships in an annual plant community.Nature Communications 12, 6192 (2021)

2021
[24]

& Stoyan, D

Wiegand, T., Grabarnik, P. & Stoyan, D. Envelope tests for spatial point patterns with and without simulation.Ecosphere7, e01365 (2016)

2016
[25]

Harris, D. J. Generating realistic assemblages with a joint species distribution model.Methods in Ecology and Evolution6, 465–473 (2015). 12

2015
[26]

J., Bourg, N

Wiegand, T., Wang, X., Anderson-Teixeira, K. J., Bourg, N. A., Cao, M., Ci, X., Davies, S. J., Hao, Z., Howe, R. W., Kress, W. J., Lian, J., Li, J., Lin, L., Lin, Y., Ma, K., McShea, W., Mi, X., Su, S.-H., Sun, I.-F., Wolf, A., Ye, W. & Huth, A. Consequences of spatial patterns for coexistence in species-rich plant communities.Nature Ecology & Evolution5,...

2021
[27]

K., Wright, S

Kalyuzhny, M., Lake, J. K., Wright, S. J. & Ostling, A. M. Pervasive within-species spatial repulsion among adult tropical trees.Science381, 563–568 (2023)

2023
[28]

Nature640, 967–973 (2025)

Wiegand, T.et al.Latitudinal scaling of aggregation with abundance and coexistence in forests. Nature640, 967–973 (2025)

2025
[29]

A., Colwell, R

Pilowsky, J. A., Colwell, R. K., Rahbek, C. & Fordham, D. A. Process-explicit models reveal the structure and dynamics of biodiversity patterns.Science Advances8, eabj2271 (2022). URL https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/sciadv.abj2271

work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.abj2271 2022
[30]

& Leathwick, J

Elith, J. & Leathwick, J. R. Species distribution models: Ecological explanation and prediction across space and time.Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics40, 677–697 (2009). URL https://www.annualreviews.org/content/journals/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.110308.120159

work page doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.110308.120159 2009
[31]

Kunin, W. E. Extrapolating species abundance across spatial scales.Science281, 1513–1515 (1998). URL https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/science.281.5382.1513

work page doi:10.1126/science.281.5382.1513 1998
[32]

J., Thomas, C

Wilson, R. J., Thomas, C. D., Fox, R., Roy, D. B. & Kunin, W. E. Spatial patterns in species distributions reveal biodiversity change.Nature432, 393–396 (2004)

2004
[33]

Shaffer, M. L. Minimum population sizes for species conservation.BioScience31, 131–134 (1981). URL https://doi.org/10.2307/1308256

work page doi:10.2307/1308256 1981
[34]

Demographic methods across the tree of life163–179 (2021)

Vindenes, Y., Le Coeur, C., Caswell, H.et al.Introduction to matrix population models. Demographic methods across the tree of life163–179 (2021)

2021
[35]

& Oli, M

Chaudhary, V. & Oli, M. K. A critical appraisal of population viability analysis.Conservation Biology34, 26–40 (2020). URL https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/cobi. 13414

work page doi:10.1111/cobi 2020
[36]

Simmonds, E. G. & Jones, O. R. Uncertainty propagation in matrix population models: Gaps, importance and guidelines.Methods in Ecology and Evolution15, 427–438 (2024). URL https: //besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/2041-210X.14276

work page doi:10.1111/2041-210x.14276 2024
[37]

Simini, F., Anfodillo, T., Carrer, M., Banavar, J. R. & Maritan, A. Self-similarity and scaling in forest communities.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences107, 7658–7662 (2010)

2010
[38]

C., Wright, S

Mart´ ınez Cano, I., Muller-Landau, H. C., Wright, S. J., Bohlman, S. A. & Pacala, S. W. Tropical tree height and crown allometries for the barro colorado nature monument, panama: a comparison of alternative hierarchical models incorporating interspecific variation in relation to life history traits.Biogeosciences16, 847–862 (2019)

2019
[39]

& Ovaskainen, O

Hanski, I. & Ovaskainen, O. The metapopulation capacity of a fragmented landscape.Nature 404, 755–758 (2000)

2000
[40]

& Loreau, M

Mouquet, N. & Loreau, M. Coexistence in metacommunities: the regional similarity hypothesis. The American Naturalist159, 420–426 (2002)

2002
[41]

& Mar- itan, A

Padmanabha, P., Nicoletti, G., Bernardi, D., Suweis, S., Azaele, S., Rinaldo, A. & Mar- itan, A. Landscape and environmental heterogeneity support coexistence in competitive metacommunities.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences121(2024). 13

2024
[42]

& Maritan, A

Azaele, S. & Maritan, A. Generalized dynamical mean field theory for non-gaussian interactions. Physical Review Letters133, 127401 (2024)

2024
[43]

& Hubbell, S

Condit, R., P´ erez, R., Aguilar, S., Lao, S., Foster, R. & Hubbell, S. Complete data from the barro colorado 50-ha plot: 423617 trees, 35 years (2019)

2019
[44]

& Okuda, T

Manokaran, N., Seng, Q., Ashton, P., LaFrankie, J., Nur Supardi, N., Ahmad, W. & Okuda, T. Pasoh forest dynamics plot, peninsular malaysia. tropical forest diversity and dynamism: findings from a large-scale plot network (2004)

2004
[45]

W., Perfecto, I

Allen, D., Vandermeer, J., Dick, C. W., Perfecto, I. & Burnham, R. J. Michigan big woods research plot data (2019)

2019
[46]

McIntire, E. J. B. & Fajardo, A. Facilitation as a ubiquitous driver of biodiversity.New Phytologist 201, 403–416 (2014)

2014
[47]

& M¨ antyniemi, S

Lind´ en, A. & M¨ antyniemi, S. Using the negative binomial distribution to model overdispersion in ecological count data.Ecology92, 1414–1421 (2011)

2011
[48]

R., Hubbell, S

Volkov, I., Banavar, J. R., Hubbell, S. P. & Maritan, A. Neutral theory and relative species abundance in ecology.Nature424, 1035–1037 (2003)

2003
[49]

S., Aguilar, S., P´ erez, R., Lao, S

Comita, L. S., Aguilar, S., P´ erez, R., Lao, S. & Hubbell, S. P. Patterns of woody plant species abundance and diversity in the seedling layer of a tropical forest.Journal of Vegetation Science 18, 163–174 (2007)

2007
[50]

& Busing, R

Brokaw, N. & Busing, R. T. Niche versus chance and tree diversity in forest gaps.Trends in Ecology & Evolution15, 183–188 (2000)

2000
[51]

J., Wirth, C., Engelbrecht, B

Kupers, S. J., Wirth, C., Engelbrecht, B. M. J., Hern´ andez, A., Condit, R., Wright, S. J. & R¨ uger, N. Performance of tropical forest seedlings under shade and drought: an interspecific trade-off in demographic responses.Scientific Reports9(2019)

2019
[52]

Jops, K., Dalling, J. W. & O’Dwyer, J. P. Life history is a key driver of temporal fluctuations in tropical tree abundances.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences122, e2422348122 (2025). URL https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.2422348122

work page doi:10.1073/pnas.2422348122 2025
[53]

& Maritan, A

Nicoletti, G., Padmanabha, P., Azaele, S., Suweis, S., Rinaldo, A. & Maritan, A. Emergent encoding of dispersal network topologies in spatial metapopulation models.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences120, e2311548120 (2023). URL https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/ 10.1073/pnas.2311548120

work page doi:10.1073/pnas.2311548120 2023
[54]

The resource-ratio hypothesis of plant succession.The American Naturalist125, 827–852 (1985)

Tilman, D. The resource-ratio hypothesis of plant succession.The American Naturalist125, 827–852 (1985). URL https://doi.org/10.1086/284382

work page doi:10.1086/284382 1985
[55]

Mayfield, M. M. & Levine, J. M. Opposing effects of competitive exclusion on the phylogenetic structure of communities.Ecology Letters13, 1085–1093 (2010). URL https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1461-0248.2010.01509.x

work page arXiv 2010
[56]

D., Stouffer, D

Bimler, M. D., Stouffer, D. B., Lai, H. R. & Mayfield, M. M. Accurate predictions of coexistence in natural systems require the inclusion of facilitative interactions and environmental dependency. Journal of Ecology106, 1839–1852 (2018)

2018
[57]

& Culver, D

Levins, R. & Culver, D. Regional coexistence of species and competition between rare species. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences68, 1246–1248 (1971). 14

1971
[58]

Levin, S. A. Dispersion and population interactions.The American Naturalist108, 207–228 (1974). URL https://doi.org/10.1086/282900

work page doi:10.1086/282900 1974
[59]

& Levin, S

Durrett, R. & Levin, S. Spatial aspects of interspecific competition.Theoretical Pop- ulation Biology53, 30–43 (1998). URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0040580997913381

1998
[60]

R., Clenet, M., Libera, K

Miller, Z. R., Clenet, M., Libera, K. D., Massol, F. & Allesina, S. Coexistence of many species under a random competition–colonization trade-off.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci- ences121, e2314215121 (2024). URL https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.2314215121

work page doi:10.1073/pnas.2314215121 2024
[61]

Levine, J. M. & Rees, M. Coexistence and relative abundance in annual plant assemblages: the roles of competition and colonization.The American Naturalist160, 452–467 (2002)

2002
[62]

S., LaDeau, S

Clark, J. S., LaDeau, S. & Ibanez, I. Fecundity of trees and the colonization–competition hypothesis.Ecological monographs74, 415–442 (2004)

2004
[63]

Empirical Evidence: Ecological Drift and Dispersal, 138–157 (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2017)

Vellend, M.9. Empirical Evidence: Ecological Drift and Dispersal, 138–157 (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2017). URL https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400883790-010

work page doi:10.1515/9781400883790-010 2017
[64]

& O’Dwyer, J

D’Andrea, R., Ostling, A. & O’Dwyer, J. P. Translucent windows: how uncertainty in competitive interactions impacts detection of community pattern.Ecology Letters21, 826–835 (2018)

2018
[65]

& Noble, I

Comins, H. & Noble, I. Dispersal, variability, and transient niches: species coexistence in a uniformly variable environment.The American Naturalist126, 706–723 (1985)

1985
[66]

Lavorel, S., O’Neill, R. V. & Gardner, R. H. Spatio-temporal dispersal strategies and annual plant species coexistence in a structured landscape.Oikos75–88 (1994)

1994
[67]

Losapio, G., Sch¨ ob, C., Staniczenko, P. P. A., Carrara, F., Palamara, G. M., De Moraes, C. M., Mescher, M. C., Brooker, R. W., Butterfield, B. J., Callaway, R. M., Cavieres, L. A., Kikvidze, Z., Lortie, C. J., Michalet, R., Pugnaire, F. I. & Bascompte, J. Network motifs involving both competition and facilitation predict biodiversity in alpine plant com...

2021
[68]

& K´ efi, S

Pichon, B., Gounand, I., Donnet, S. & K´ efi, S. The interplay of facilitation and competition drives the emergence of multistability in dryland plant communities.Ecology105, e4369 (2024)

2024
[69]

G., Hallett, L

Buche, L., Shoemaker, L. G., Hallett, L. M., Bartomeus, I., Vesk, P., Weiss-Lehman, C., May- field, M. & Godoy, O. A continuum from positive to negative interactions drives plant species’ performance in a diverse community.Ecology Letters28, e70059 (2025)

2025
[70]

Competition and biodiversity in spatially structured habitats.Ecology75, 2–16 (1994)

Tilman, D. Competition and biodiversity in spatially structured habitats.Ecology75, 2–16 (1994). URL https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.2307/1939377

work page doi:10.2307/1939377 1994
[71]

homogeneous inhomogeneity,

Tovo, A., Suweis, S., Formentin, M., Favretti, M., Volkov, I., Banavar, J. R., Azaele, S. & Maritan, A. Upscaling species richness and abundances in tropical forests.Science Advances3, e1701438 (2017). Methods Model Our theory is based on a mathematical model describing the temporal dynamics ofSspecies inhabiting a landscape ofNsites, each with a finite a...

work page arXiv 2017