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 |
![["languages_typename_ge" not defined]](/images/flags/ge.png)

