Document Type

Article

Original Publication Date

2017

Volume

19

Issue

5

DOI of Original Publication

10.1007/s10530-016-1356-2

Comments

Originally published at https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-016-1356-2

Date of Submission

June 2017

Abstract

Dick et al. (Biol Invasions, 2017) propose that the comparative functional response framework provides a unifying approach for the study of invasive species. We agree that functional responses are an important and powerful quantitative description of consumer effects on resources, and co-opting classical ecological theory to better predict invasive species impacts is a laudable move for invasion biology. However, we fear that the early successes of select examples of the comparative functional response (CFR) approach has led Dick et al. to exaggerate the generality of its utility, and about its ability to unify the field. Further, they fail to provide a convincing argument why CFR is better than existing tools such as invasion history or impact indices, even when considering emerging or potential invaders. In this response we provide details of three conceptual issues stemming from classical ecological theoretical frameworks and two practical problems that Dick et al. and other CFR proponents need to address.

Rights

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Is Part Of

VCU Biology Publications

Included in

Biology Commons

Share

COinS
 
 
 
View graphic version