The "Balance of Nature" and "Population Control"
- 1 March 1967
- journal article
- research article
- Published by University of Chicago Press in The American Naturalist
- Vol. 101 (918) , 97-107
- https://doi.org/10.1086/282477
Abstract
The notion that nature is in some sort of "balance" with respect to population size, or that populations in general show relatively little fluctuation in size, is demonstrably false. The thesis of Hairston, Smith, and Slobodkin that "populations of producers, carnivores, and decomposers are limited by their respective resources in the classical density-dependent fashion" is based on a series of assumptions about these trophic levels which are, in all probability, false. Even if the assumptions are true, this conclusion does not follow from them. A realistic basis for building models dealing with the changes of numbers in populations would include the following propositions: All populations are constantly changing in size. The environments of all organisms are constantly changing. Local populations must be recognized and investigated if changes in population size are to be understood. The influence on population size of various components of environment varies with population density, among species, among local populations, and through time.This publication has 5 references indexed in Scilit:
- "Community Structure, Population Control, and Competition"-A CritiqueThe American Naturalist, 1966
- THE POPULATION BIOLOGY OF THE BUTTERFLY, EUPHYDRYAS EDITHA. II. THE STRUCTURE OF THE JASPER RIDGE COLONYEvolution, 1965
- BUTTERFLIES AND PLANTS: A STUDY IN COEVOLUTIONEvolution, 1964
- Community Structure, Population Control, and CompetitionThe American Naturalist, 1960
- Experimental Background to the Study of the Distribution and Abundance of Insects: II. The Relation Between Innate Capacity for Increase in Numbers and the Abundance of Three Grain Beetles in Experimental PopulationsEcology, 1953