Abstract
Community ecology is an inherently complicated field, confounded by the conflicting use of fundamental terms. Nearly two decades ago, Fauth etal. (1996) demonstrated that imprecise language led to the virtual synonymy of important terms and so attempted to clearly define four keywords in community ecology; "community," "assemblage," "guild," and "ensemble". We revisit Fauth etal.'s conclusion and discuss how the use of these terms has changed over time since their review. An updated analysis of term definition from a selection of popular ecological textbooks suggests that definitions have drifted away from those encountered pre-1996, and slightly disagreed with results from a survey of 100 ecology professionals (comprising of academic professors, nonacademic PhDs, graduate and undergraduate biology students). Results suggest that confusion about these terms is still widespread in ecology. We conclude with clear suggestions for definitions of each term to be adopted hereafter to provide greater cohesion among research groups.
Highlights
Ecology is a young but rapidly developing field of science
To estimate how these four terms are used by the contemporary ecological community, we developed a survey that asked ecologists to define the four key terms
An observed shift toward definitions which do not require species interactions is evident. This disagrees with our survey results which suggest over half of ecologists (51.58%; Table 1) consider interspecific interactions to be a key component of a community
Summary
Ecology is a young but rapidly developing field of science. Unlike more established fields, such as mathematics and physics, ecologists are yet to create an established and unambiguous framework of terminology (Hodges 2008). Two decades ago, Fauth et al (1996) (hereafter Fauth et al.) attempted to clarify terminology in the field of community ecology, a subdiscipline of ecology that is frequently criticized for being jargon-filled and prone to synonymy (Peters 1976; Thorp 1986; Mills et al 1993; Frazier 1994; Morin 2011). Improper and irregular use of distinct terms generates confusion, among students, that may negatively impact scientific understanding and development. It is important to clearly define key terms to facilitate scientific communication, increase precision of foundational concepts and ideas, and aid the directional development of future research. A recent request for the establishment of a Convention of Ecology Nomenclature (CEN) (Herrando-Perez et al 2014) highlights the widespread problem of imprecise terminology in ecology and provides well-timed support for the utility of this review
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callDisclaimer: 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.
