Abstract

It is commonly asserted in the ecological and economic literature that habitat loss is the main cause of loss of imperiled species. The evidence clearly shows that habitat loss is a common contributing factor, but there is little evidence that it is the most important factor. Studies that have focused on the mechanisms of species loss have failed to produce models capable of predicting patterns of loss as a function of human activities. I propose that this is because ecologists have employed an unrealistic conceptual model of the functioning of natural systems. Karl Popper's construct of the propensities of natural systems provides a more realistic view, and better potential to yield predictive models. I provide two examples of patterns of biodiversity and species loss in Canada where mechanistic reasoning is inconsistent with the observed propensities of species loss. To cite this article: D.J. Currie, C. R. Biologies 326 (2003).

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.