
doi: 10.2307/1936607
Currently used niche measures of overlap and breadth are shown to be inappropriate for analyzing field data. Previously proposed measures assume resources are equally available, but this assumption is unwarranted in field studies. Comparisons of different measures of either breadth or overlap are also not valid. A measure of niche breadth is derived by asking how likely it is that a species' utilization of resources could have been drawn from the available resources in the environment. An overlap measure is derived in a similar manner and represents the likelihood that the utilization of resources by one species is identical to the utilization by another species. Tests for comparing different measures are given.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 124 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
