Skip to main content
Log in

Spatially distributed stochasticity and the constancy of ecosystems

  • Published:
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ifconstancy is a measure of an ecosystem's (in) variability through time andstability is a measure of the system's ability to damp and recover from environmental perturbations, then constancy depends not only on stability but also on the frequency and amplitude of perturbations—theenvironmental “noise level”. The stability of an ecosystem reflects its texture, extent, and viscosity (fine-scale structure); the noise level experienced by the system (“effective” noise level) reflects the level at any point (“ambient” noise level), the spectrum of stochastic scale (regional distribution of stochasticity), and the system's spatial extent (size, or number of patches included). The coefficient of variation of a limiting stochastic variate is a measure of the effective noise level. Ifp is the total number of patches in the system (its extent) andn is the number of contiguous patches with noise signals correlated through time (its stochastic scale), then the coefficient of variation is directly proportional to\(\sqrt {(n/p)} \) whenevern<p. Thus ecosystems of small stochastic scalen or large sizep damp out environmental noise by “spreading the risk” in space, thereby reducing their variability in time.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature

  • Boer, P. J. den. 1968. “Spreading of risk and stabilization of animal numbers.”Acta Biotheor.,18, 165–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —. 1971. “Stabilization of animal numbers and the heterogeneity of the environment: the problem of the persistence of sparse populations.” InProceedings of the Advanced Study Institute on “Dynamics of Numbers in Populations.” Boer, P. J. den and Gradwell, G. R., eds., pp. 77–97. Centre for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation. Wageningen, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • — and G. R. Gradwell, eds. 1971.Proceedings of the Advanced Study Institute on “Dynamics of Numbers in Populations.” Centre for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation, Wageningen, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borchert, J. R. 1950. “The climate of the central North American grassland.”Ann. Ass. Am. Geogr.,40, 1–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, C. F. 1961. “The ecology of fire.”Scient. Am.,204, 150–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crowley, P. H. 1975. “Spatial heterogeneity and the stability of a predator-prey link.” Ph.D. Thesis, Michigan State University.

  • Crowley, P. H. 1975. “A graphical analysis of predator-prey dynamics: effective size and the persistence of ecosystems.” In preparation.

  • Holling, C. S. 1973. “Resilience and stability of ecological systems”A. Rev. Ecol. System.,4, 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horn, H. S. and R. H. MacArthur 1972. “On competition in a diverse and patchy environment.”Ecology,53, 749–752.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huffaker, C. B. 1958. “Experimental studies on predation: dispersion factors and predator-prey oscillations.”Hilgardia,27, 323–383.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langmuir, I. 1938. “Surface motion of water induced by wind.”Science,87, 119–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, S. A. and R. T. Paine. 1974. “Disturbance, patch formation, and community structure.”Proc. Natn. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.,71, 2744–2747.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Loucks, O. L. 1970. “Evolution of diversity, efficiency and community stability”Am. Zool.,10, 17–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luckinbill, L. S. 1973. “Coexistence in laboratory populations ofParamecium aurelia and its predatorDidinium nasutum.”Ecology,54, 1320–1327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1974. “The effects of space and enrichment on a predator-prey, system.”Ecology,55, 1142–1147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur, R. and E. Pianka. 1966. “On optimal use of a patchy environment.”Am. Nat., 100, 603–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • May, R. M. 1971. “Stability in model ecosystems.”Proc. Ecol. Soc. Australia,6, 18–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1973.Complexity and Stability in Model Ecosystems. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton Univ. Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1974. “Ecosystem patterns in randomly fluctuating environments.” InProgress in Theoretical Biology, Vol. 3. Rosen, R. and R. M. Snell, eds., pp. 1–50. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Platt, T. and K. L. Denman. 1975. “Spectral analysis in ecology.”A. Rev. Ecol. System.,4, 189–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, T. M., P. J. Richerson, T. M. Dillon, B. A. Agee, B. J. Dozier, D. A. Godden and L. O. Myrup. 1975. “Spatial scales of current speed and phytoplankton biomass fluctuations in Lake Tahoe.”Science,189, 1088–1090.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reddingius, J. and P. J. den Boer. 1970. “Simulation experiments illustrating stabilization of animal numbers by spreading of risk.”Oecologia,5, 240–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards, P. and G. B. Williamson. 1975. “Treefalls and patterns of understory species in a wet lowland tropical forest.”Ecology,56, 1226–1229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roff, D. A. 1974a. “Spatial heterogeneity and the persistence of populations.”Oecologia,15, 245–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1974b. “An analysis of a population model demonstrating the importance of dispersal in a heterogeneous environment.”Oecologia,15, 259–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1974c. “A comment of the Number-of-Factors Model of Reddingius and den Boer.”Am. Nat.,108, 391–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, R. 1970.Dynamical System Theory in Biology, Vol. 1:Stability Theory and its Applications. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, H. L. 1969. “Benthic marine diversity and the stability-time hypothesis.” InDiversity and Stability in Ecological Systems. Woodwell, G. M. and H. H. Smith, eds. pp. 71–81. Brookhaven Symposia in Biology, Number 22. Brookhaven Natn. Lab., Upton, N.Y.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slobodkin, L. B. and H. L. Sanders. 1969. “On the contribution of environmental predictability to species diversity.” InDiversity and Stability in Ecological Systems. Woodwell, G. M. and H. H. Smith, eds., pp. 82–95. Brookhaven Symposia in Biology, Number 22. Brookhaven Natn. Lab., Upton, N.Y.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, F. E. 1972. “Spatial heterogeneity, stability and diversity in ecosystems.” InGrowth by Intussusception: Ecological Essays in Honor of G. Evelyn Hutchinson, Deevey, E. S., ed., pp. 309–335. New Haven: Conn. Acad. Arts Sci.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Crowley, P.H. Spatially distributed stochasticity and the constancy of ecosystems. Bltn Mathcal Biology 39, 157–166 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02462855

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02462855

Keywords

Navigation