The Neutral—Niche Debate: A Philosophical Perspective

Ecological communities around the world are under threat while a consensus theory of community structure remains elusive. In the last decade ecologists have struggled with two seemingly opposing theories: niche-based theory that explains diversity with species’ differences and the neutral theory of...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Acta biotheoretica 2012-09, Vol.60 (3), p.257-271
Hauptverfasser: Wennekes, Paul L., Rosindell, James, Etienne, Rampal S.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 271
container_issue 3
container_start_page 257
container_title Acta biotheoretica
container_volume 60
creator Wennekes, Paul L.
Rosindell, James
Etienne, Rampal S.
description Ecological communities around the world are under threat while a consensus theory of community structure remains elusive. In the last decade ecologists have struggled with two seemingly opposing theories: niche-based theory that explains diversity with species’ differences and the neutral theory of biodiversity that claims that much of the diversity we observe can be explained without explicitly invoking species’ differences. Although ecologists are increasingly attempting to reconcile these two theories, there is still much resistance against the neutral theory of biodiversity. Here we argue that the dispute between the two theories is a classic example of the dichotomy between philosophical perspectives, realism and instrumentalism. Realism is associated with specific, small-scale and detailed explanations, whereas instrumentalism is linked to general, large-scale, but less precise accounts. Recognizing this will help ecologists get both niche-based and neutral theories in perspective as useful tools for understanding biodiversity patterns.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s10441-012-9144-6
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3440563</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1282516059</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-ffccd3752603b655d7f9ad2e89466f9c5026f085612e07ae88e38a1879c0c1683</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kc9KHEEQxpsQiRvjA-QSFnLxMqaq_7cHQTSJAVEP5tz09ta4I7Mza_eMkFsewifMk6SXVVHBU1HUV199xY-xzwj7CGC-ZQQpsQLklUMpK_2OTVAZXlmh7Hs2AQCslJB8m33M-aa0Thv4wLY5F8CF5hNmrhY0PadxSKH99_f-vImlP6FZGOhgejS9XDRtn_vVoomhnV5SyiuKQ3NHn9hWHdpMuw91h_3-8f3q-LQ6u_j56_jorIrSwFDVdYxzYRTXIGZaqbmpXZhzsk5qXbuogOsarNLICUwga0nYgNa4CBG1FTvscOO7GmdLmkfq1kn9KjXLkP74PjT-5aRrFv66v_NCSlBaFIO9B4PU346UB79scqS2DR31Y_bILVeoQbki_fpKetOPqSvveQTh0HFl1olwo4qpzzlR_RQGwa-x-A0WX7D4NRavy86X5188bTxyKAK-EeQy6q4pPT_9lut_e06XNA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1039192578</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Neutral—Niche Debate: A Philosophical Perspective</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Springer Nature</source><creator>Wennekes, Paul L. ; Rosindell, James ; Etienne, Rampal S.</creator><creatorcontrib>Wennekes, Paul L. ; Rosindell, James ; Etienne, Rampal S.</creatorcontrib><description>Ecological communities around the world are under threat while a consensus theory of community structure remains elusive. In the last decade ecologists have struggled with two seemingly opposing theories: niche-based theory that explains diversity with species’ differences and the neutral theory of biodiversity that claims that much of the diversity we observe can be explained without explicitly invoking species’ differences. Although ecologists are increasingly attempting to reconcile these two theories, there is still much resistance against the neutral theory of biodiversity. Here we argue that the dispute between the two theories is a classic example of the dichotomy between philosophical perspectives, realism and instrumentalism. Realism is associated with specific, small-scale and detailed explanations, whereas instrumentalism is linked to general, large-scale, but less precise accounts. Recognizing this will help ecologists get both niche-based and neutral theories in perspective as useful tools for understanding biodiversity patterns.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0001-5342</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1572-8358</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10441-012-9144-6</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22302362</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Biodiversity ; Ecosystem ; Education ; Evolutionary Biology ; Mathematical Concepts ; Models, Biological ; Philosophy ; Philosophy of Biology ; Regular ; Regular Article ; Species Specificity</subject><ispartof>Acta biotheoretica, 2012-09, Vol.60 (3), p.257-271</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2012</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-ffccd3752603b655d7f9ad2e89466f9c5026f085612e07ae88e38a1879c0c1683</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-ffccd3752603b655d7f9ad2e89466f9c5026f085612e07ae88e38a1879c0c1683</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10441-012-9144-6$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10441-012-9144-6$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22302362$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Wennekes, Paul L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rosindell, James</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Etienne, Rampal S.</creatorcontrib><title>The Neutral—Niche Debate: A Philosophical Perspective</title><title>Acta biotheoretica</title><addtitle>Acta Biotheor</addtitle><addtitle>Acta Biotheor</addtitle><description>Ecological communities around the world are under threat while a consensus theory of community structure remains elusive. In the last decade ecologists have struggled with two seemingly opposing theories: niche-based theory that explains diversity with species’ differences and the neutral theory of biodiversity that claims that much of the diversity we observe can be explained without explicitly invoking species’ differences. Although ecologists are increasingly attempting to reconcile these two theories, there is still much resistance against the neutral theory of biodiversity. Here we argue that the dispute between the two theories is a classic example of the dichotomy between philosophical perspectives, realism and instrumentalism. Realism is associated with specific, small-scale and detailed explanations, whereas instrumentalism is linked to general, large-scale, but less precise accounts. Recognizing this will help ecologists get both niche-based and neutral theories in perspective as useful tools for understanding biodiversity patterns.</description><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Ecosystem</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Evolutionary Biology</subject><subject>Mathematical Concepts</subject><subject>Models, Biological</subject><subject>Philosophy</subject><subject>Philosophy of Biology</subject><subject>Regular</subject><subject>Regular Article</subject><subject>Species Specificity</subject><issn>0001-5342</issn><issn>1572-8358</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kc9KHEEQxpsQiRvjA-QSFnLxMqaq_7cHQTSJAVEP5tz09ta4I7Mza_eMkFsewifMk6SXVVHBU1HUV199xY-xzwj7CGC-ZQQpsQLklUMpK_2OTVAZXlmh7Hs2AQCslJB8m33M-aa0Thv4wLY5F8CF5hNmrhY0PadxSKH99_f-vImlP6FZGOhgejS9XDRtn_vVoomhnV5SyiuKQ3NHn9hWHdpMuw91h_3-8f3q-LQ6u_j56_jorIrSwFDVdYxzYRTXIGZaqbmpXZhzsk5qXbuogOsarNLICUwga0nYgNa4CBG1FTvscOO7GmdLmkfq1kn9KjXLkP74PjT-5aRrFv66v_NCSlBaFIO9B4PU346UB79scqS2DR31Y_bILVeoQbki_fpKetOPqSvveQTh0HFl1olwo4qpzzlR_RQGwa-x-A0WX7D4NRavy86X5188bTxyKAK-EeQy6q4pPT_9lut_e06XNA</recordid><startdate>20120901</startdate><enddate>20120901</enddate><creator>Wennekes, Paul L.</creator><creator>Rosindell, James</creator><creator>Etienne, Rampal S.</creator><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7QR</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120901</creationdate><title>The Neutral—Niche Debate: A Philosophical Perspective</title><author>Wennekes, Paul L. ; Rosindell, James ; Etienne, Rampal S.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-ffccd3752603b655d7f9ad2e89466f9c5026f085612e07ae88e38a1879c0c1683</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Ecosystem</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Evolutionary Biology</topic><topic>Mathematical Concepts</topic><topic>Models, Biological</topic><topic>Philosophy</topic><topic>Philosophy of Biology</topic><topic>Regular</topic><topic>Regular Article</topic><topic>Species Specificity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wennekes, Paul L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rosindell, James</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Etienne, Rampal S.</creatorcontrib><collection>SpringerOpen</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Calcium &amp; Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Chemoreception Abstracts</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Health Medical collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Acta biotheoretica</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wennekes, Paul L.</au><au>Rosindell, James</au><au>Etienne, Rampal S.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Neutral—Niche Debate: A Philosophical Perspective</atitle><jtitle>Acta biotheoretica</jtitle><stitle>Acta Biotheor</stitle><addtitle>Acta Biotheor</addtitle><date>2012-09-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>60</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>257</spage><epage>271</epage><pages>257-271</pages><issn>0001-5342</issn><eissn>1572-8358</eissn><abstract>Ecological communities around the world are under threat while a consensus theory of community structure remains elusive. In the last decade ecologists have struggled with two seemingly opposing theories: niche-based theory that explains diversity with species’ differences and the neutral theory of biodiversity that claims that much of the diversity we observe can be explained without explicitly invoking species’ differences. Although ecologists are increasingly attempting to reconcile these two theories, there is still much resistance against the neutral theory of biodiversity. Here we argue that the dispute between the two theories is a classic example of the dichotomy between philosophical perspectives, realism and instrumentalism. Realism is associated with specific, small-scale and detailed explanations, whereas instrumentalism is linked to general, large-scale, but less precise accounts. Recognizing this will help ecologists get both niche-based and neutral theories in perspective as useful tools for understanding biodiversity patterns.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Netherlands</pub><pmid>22302362</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10441-012-9144-6</doi><tpages>15</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0001-5342
ispartof Acta biotheoretica, 2012-09, Vol.60 (3), p.257-271
issn 0001-5342
1572-8358
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3440563
source MEDLINE; Springer Nature
subjects Biodiversity
Ecosystem
Education
Evolutionary Biology
Mathematical Concepts
Models, Biological
Philosophy
Philosophy of Biology
Regular
Regular Article
Species Specificity
title The Neutral—Niche Debate: A Philosophical Perspective
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T14%3A01%3A20IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Neutral%E2%80%94Niche%20Debate:%20A%20Philosophical%20Perspective&rft.jtitle=Acta%20biotheoretica&rft.au=Wennekes,%20Paul%20L.&rft.date=2012-09-01&rft.volume=60&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=257&rft.epage=271&rft.pages=257-271&rft.issn=0001-5342&rft.eissn=1572-8358&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10441-012-9144-6&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1282516059%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1039192578&rft_id=info:pmid/22302362&rfr_iscdi=true