
<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>');
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://www.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=undefined&type=result"></script>');
-->
</script>
Abstract Analysis of trophic interactions in soil food webs requires methods for obtaining reliable trophic information and organizing that information into functional units. Methods of obtaining trophic information about soil organisms fall into three general categories: (I) direct observation; (II) gut content analysis; (III) experiment/inference. Trophic information is interpreted using two conceptual models: (1) food webs (i.e. maps of feeding relationships among trophic species); (2) trophic levels (i.e. sequentially diminishing energy levels). Trophic classifications often confound these two conceptual models by defining an organism's feeding behavior in terms of trophic levels (e.g. herbivore, carnivore, detritivore) or pseudotrophic levels (e.g. fungivore, nematophage, insectivore). Simplistic trophic classifications miss many of the links in real food webs, result in theory based on false assumptions and limit the application of ecological principles to applied research.
citations 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). | 16 | |
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. | Average | |
influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
views | 56 | |
downloads | 17 |