This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Perry, G. L.W. Search for Related Content GeoRef GeoRef Citation Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Landscapes, space and equilibrium: shifting viewpoints

Department of Geography, King’s College London, Strand, London WC2R 2LS, UK

The classical view of ecological systems has been one that assumes a state of equilibrium and stability; this is encapsulated in the ‘balance of nature’ paradigm. Over the last 30 years ecologists and biogeographers have rejected the view that ecological systems are inherently stable or at some sort of equilibrium. Instead a nonequilibrium view, emphasizing the role of chance events such as disturbance in ecological dynamics, has become dominant. Alongside this change, the way in which the roles of space and spatial heterogeneity in ecological dynamics are viewed has shifted. Classical ecological theory tended to ignore spatial dynamics and heterogeneity and focused instead on temporal pattern. Over the last 20 years this view has also changed and the importance of spatial pattern has been emphasized. Through the explicit consideration of space and spatial pattern it has been shown that spatial heterogeneity may act to either stabilize or destabilize ecological systems and processes. This paper reviews these two changes in the way ecological systems are conceptualized and explores how they are inter-related. Advances in our understanding of the role of space and the nature of equilibrium in ecological systems are discussed within the context of both modelling and empirical studies, as are the problems involved with experimentally testing the large body of spatial theory developed.

Key Words: disturbance • equilibrium • landscape ecology • scale • spatial models • spatial pattern • succession

Progress in Physical Geography, Vol. 26, No. 3, 339-359 (2002)
DOI: 10.1191/0309133302pp341ra


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				L. J. Bracken and J. Wainwright Equilibrium in the balance? Implications for landscape evolution from dryland environments Geological Society, London, Special Publications, January 1, 2008; 296(1): 29 - 46. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Kent Biogeography and landscape ecology Progress in Physical Geography, June 1, 2007; 31(3): 345 - 355. [PDF]

				M. Kent, R. A. Moyeed, C. L. Reid, R. Pakeman, and R. Weaver Geostatistics, spatial rate of change analysis and boundary detection in plant ecology and biogeography Progress in Physical Geography, April 1, 2006; 30(2): 201 - 231. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. L.W. Perry and N. J. Enright Spatial modelling of vegetation change in dynamic landscapes: a review of methods and applications Progress in Physical Geography, January 1, 2006; 30(1): 47 - 72. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. D. A. Millington, G. L. W. Perry, and B. D. Malamud Models, data and mechanisms: quantifying wildfire regimes Geological Society, London, Special Publications, January 1, 2006; 261(1): 155 - 167. [Abstract] [PDF]

				On the Interpretation of Shallow Shelf Carbonate Facies and Habitats: How Much Does Water Depth Matter? Journal of Sedimentary Research, January 1, 2004; 74(1): 2 - 6.