Study
The intermediate disturbance hypothesis should be abandoned
Fox, Jeremy W.
Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 2013
Examines whether the mechanism the hypothesis proposes actually produces the predicted diversity peak under coexistence theory, and reviews how often the hump-shaped pattern is observed.
- Sample size
- theoretical and empirical review of the hypothesis
The proposed mechanism does not reliably generate a diversity peak at intermediate disturbance, and the empirical pattern is absent in the majority of studies testing for it.
What it means
The authors' reading, and ours. Where they differ, that difference is the point.
How the authors put it
The hypothesis is logically flawed as usually stated and should be replaced by coexistence mechanisms that specify how species differences interact with disturbance.
How NatureHQ reads it
A useful example of a widely taught idea being challenged on its logic rather than only on its data. The argument is that reducing competitive exclusion does not by itself maintain diversity — species must also differ in ways that let each recover when rare. That is the same requirement coexistence theory imposes everywhere else, and it is the step the hypothesis skips.
- A position paper in a continuing argument; not everyone accepts the conclusion.
- Disturbance clearly does affect diversity; what is disputed is the specific hump-shaped prediction and its mechanism.
What this study is used for on NatureHQ
One study can inform several subjects. Here is everywhere this one is cited.
Published by: Cell PressPublished in a Cell Press journal.
doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2012.08.014
Checked against Crossref on 2026-09-28, and they agree on the title, the authors and the year.
NatureHQ summarises research in its own words and does not reproduce published text. Reviewed 2026-09-04.