4.8 Review

The more-individuals hypothesis revisited: the role of community abundance in species richness regulation and the productivity-diversity relationship

Journal

ECOLOGY LETTERS
Volume 21, Issue 6, Pages 920-937

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ele.12941

Keywords

Abundance; biodiversity patterns; climate; diversity equilibria; environmental productivity; extinction; latitudinal diversity gradient; speciation; species-energy relationship

Categories

Funding

  1. Czech Science Foundation [16-26369S]
  2. Charles University International Mobility Fellowship

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Species richness increases with energy availability, yet there is little consensus as to the exact processes driving this species-energy relationship. The most straightforward explanation is the more-individuals hypothesis (MIH). It states that higher energy availability promotes a higher total number of individuals in a community, which consequently increases species richness by allowing for a greater number of species with viable populations. Empirical support for the MIH is mixed, partially due to the lack of proper formalisation of the MIH and consequent confusion as to its exact predictions. Here, we review the evidence of the MIH and evaluate the reliability of various predictions that have been tested. There is only limited evidence that spatial variation in species richness is driven by variation in the total number of individuals. There are also problems with measures of energy availability, with scale-dependence, and with the direction of causality, as the total number of individuals may sometimes itself be driven by the number of species. However, even in such a case the total number of individuals may be involved in diversity regulation. We propose a formal theory that encompasses these processes, clarifying how the different factors affecting diversity dynamics can be disentangled.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available