THE CONFUSION BETWEEN SCALE-DEFINED LEVELS AND CONVENTIONAL LEVELS OF ORGANIZATION IN ECOLOGY

被引:77
作者
ALLEN, TFH
HOEKSTRA, TW
机构
[1] Department of Botany, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin
[2] USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest & Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, Colorado
关键词
Community; Criteria for observation; Ecosystem; Hierarchy theory; Landscape; Population; Scale;
D O I
10.2307/3236048
中图分类号
Q94 [植物学];
学科分类号
071001 ;
摘要
Abstract. Conventional levels of organization in ecology can be hierarchically ordered, but there is not necessarily a time or space scale‐dependent difference between the classes: cell, organism, population, community, ecosystem, landscape, biome and biosphere. The physical processes that ecological systems must obey are strictly scaled in time and space, but communities or ecosystems may be either large or small. Conventional levels of organization are not scale‐dependent, but are criteria for telling foreground from background, or the object from its context. We erect a scheme that separates scale‐ordered levels from the conventional levels of organization. By comparing landscapes, communities and ecosystems all at the same scale, we find that communities and ecosystems do not map onto places on the landscape. Rather, communities and ecosystems are wave interference patterns between processes and organisms interfering with and accomodating to each other, even though they occur at different scales on the landscape, and so have different periodicities in their waved behavior. Population members are usually commensurately scaled and so do not generally interact to give interference patterns. Populations are therefore tangible, oratleastcan be assigned a location at an instant in time. 1990 IAVS ‐ the International Association of Vegetation Science
引用
收藏
页码:5 / 12
页数:8
相关论文
共 17 条
[1]  
Allen T.F.H., Hoekstra T.W., Towards a unified ecology
[2]  
Allen T.F.PL, O'Neill R.V., Hoekstra P.W., Interlevel relations in ecological research management: some working principles from hierarchy theory, J. Appl. Syst. Anal., 14, pp. 63-79, (1987)
[3]  
Allen P.F.H., Starr P.B., Hierarchy: perspectives for ecological complexity, (1982)
[4]  
Cooper W.S., Phe fundamentals of vegetation change, Ecology, 7, pp. 391-413, (1926)
[5]  
Curtis J.P., Phe vegetation of Wisconsin, (1959)
[6]  
Gleason H.A., Plant associations and their classification: a reply to Dr. Nichols, 1, pp. 624-641, (1929)
[7]  
Greig-Smith P., Quantitative plant ecology, (1983)
[8]  
Huntley B., Webb P., Migration: species' response to climatic variations caused by changes in the earth s orbit, J. Biogeogr., 16, pp. 5-19, (1989)
[9]  
Pevandowsky M., White B.S., Randomness, time scales, and the evolution of biological communities, Evol. Biol., 10, pp. 69-161, (1977)
[10]  
MacMahon J.A., Phillips D.P., Robinson J.V., Schimpf D.J., Pevels of biological organization: an organism‐centered approach, Bioscience, 28, pp. 700-704, (1978)