A Meta-Analysis of Competition in Field Experiments

Citations Over TimeTop 1% of 1992 papers

Abstract

A meta-analysis was conducted on field-competition experiments published in six journals over a 10-yr period. We analyzed the effects of competition on the biomass of organisms belonging to 93 species in a wide variety of habitats. Competition had a large effect overall, with a great deal of heterogeneity in that effect among organisms. There were large differences among trophic levels in competitive effects, but the relative magnitude of competition at different trophic levels was contrary to the predictions of ecological theory. Primary producers and carnivores displayed small to medium effects. In these two groups, interspecific effects did not differ from intraspecific effects, nor did effects differ in terrestrial versus aquatic habitats. The effects of competition on herbivores ranged from large effects on anurans and lotic arthropods, to medium effects on marine mollusks and echinoderms, to effects that were not statistically distinguishable from zero for terrestrial arthropods. Interspecific competitive effects among these herbivore groups were generally less than intraspecific effects. Among primary producers, the effects of competition were not different in high- and low-productivity habitats. Across all taxa, large organisms did not experience greater competitive effects than small organisms, and competitive effects did not depend on the size attained in the absence of competitors. The effects of competition were weakly density-dependent in cases in which it was possible to examine the effects of the density of neighbors. Experiments conducted on caged organisms resulted in greater competitive effects than those with free-roaming and unenclosed organisms. Experiments with small sample sizes, short durations, and poor experimental design were more variable than experiments that were larger, longer, and better planned.

Related Papers

• → Competition and coexistence in plant communities: intraspecific competition is stronger than interspecific competition(2018)561 cited
• → Interactions of Intraspecific, Interspecific, and Apparent Competition with Host‐Pathogen Population Dynamics(1992)90 cited
• → Accounting for interspecific competition and age structure in demographic analyses of density dependence improves predictions of fluctuations in population size(2019)26 cited
• → Species coexistence under resource competition with intraspecific and interspecific direct competition in a chemostat(2010)7 cited
• → Interspecific competition in perennial sedentary organisms: An individual‐based model(2022)2 cited