Kikvidze, Zaal and Suzuki, Maki and Brooker, Rob (2011) Conceptualizing importance: response to Freckleton and Rees. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 26. pp. 499-500. ISSN Cell Press
This is the latest version of this item.
|
Text
Kikvidze Suzuki Brooker 2011 TREE resp.pdf Download (132kB) | Preview |
Abstract
Freckleton and Rees make three major critical points on our recent paper in TREE: (i) we highlight Cimp, which is a flawed index of competition; (ii) we incorrectly dismiss previous measures of competition as ‘binary tests’; (iii) the question of ‘importance’ of competition depends on the context in which it is being examined, and the measure used should be driven by the question asked. We disagree.
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
Subjects: | Q Science > Ecology |
Divisions: | Institutes > 4D Research Institute |
Depositing User: | Prof. Zaal Kikvidze |
Date Deposited: | 16 Apr 2015 06:02 |
Last Modified: | 16 Apr 2015 06:02 |
URI: | http://eprints.iliauni.edu.ge/id/eprint/2065 |
Available Versions of this Item
-
Conceptualizing importance: response to Freckleton and Rees. (deposited 23 Jan 2014 19:22)
- Conceptualizing importance: response to Freckleton and Rees. (deposited 16 Apr 2015 06:02) [Currently Displayed]
Actions (login required)
View Item |