Oh, how we pick and choose: on theoretical constructs in subfields of ecology

• Ecology consists of a large number of theoretical constructs, empirical patterns and methods; a pool from which applied ecology can draw ideas when exploring practical problems. Subfields of applied ecology - including pest control, conservation, and wildlife management - deal with the management of biological populations, and should therefore rest on the same ecological foundations. But is this really the case? We study this issue by analyzing recent citation rates (2010-2014) to more than 130 highly cited, classic publications, covering a wide range of topics. Using ordination methods, we find a clear clustering of journals, where conservation occupies another part of the ordination space than pest control. Classifying papers into broad topics reveals that the ordination patterns are driven by striking differences in how often ecological concepts are used in different subfields. While some patterns are easy to understand, e.g. the use of biodiversity concepts in conservation, others are left unexplained. For instance, the lack of spatial concepts and competition in pest control, predation in conservation journals, and foodweb ideas in wildlife journals are harder to understand. Microbial ecology also appears devoid of large parts of ecological theory. These patterns imply distinct divides within ecology, where subfields selectively use certain parts of ecological theory. Therefore, we argue that work in applied ecology would benefit from broader theoretical perspectives. Collaboration and inspiration across sub-disciplines could be one way to achieve this, perhaps inspiring novel research directions.

Ämnesord

NATURVETENSKAP  -- Biologi -- Annan biologi (hsv//swe)

NATURAL SCIENCES  -- Biological Sciences -- Other Biological Topics (hsv//eng)

NATURVETENSKAP  -- Biologi -- Ekologi (hsv//swe)

NATURAL SCIENCES  -- Biological Sciences -- Ecology (hsv//eng)

Publikations- och innehållstyp

vet (ämneskategori)

ovr (ämneskategori)