Melbourne BA, Sears AL, Donahue MJ, Chesson P (2005).
Applying scale transition theory to metacommunities in the field.
In M. Holyoak, M. A. Leibold and R. D. Holt eds. Metacommunities: Spatial Dynamics and Ecological Communities. Chicago, University of Chicago Press. pp 307-330.
1) For the chapter in the printed book, a typographical error crept in at the proof stage. Term (c) in figure 13.2 (page 315) should not be halved. It should be:
This is correct in the preprint.
2) We have since re-analyzed the data presented in figure 13.1 and 13.2. In particular, we realized that the smallest scale should be larger than the smallest scale we could measure. Here, in the book chapter, we took the smallest scale to correspond to the size of our measuring device (2.4 cm diameter). However, this is the error scale in our fitted model. The smallest spatial scale in the fitted model is therefore a scale larger than this. We took two samples about 5 cm apart, so our smallest scale is about 10 cm in diameter, and we refer to it as the rock scale. As the variance from the error scale no longer enters into the spatial variance at the scale of estimation (now the rock scale), the scale transition is different to that presented here. However, the difference is slight, and the general pattern is the same. The re-analyzed data can be found in:
Melbourne BA & Chesson P (2006).
The scale transition: scaling up population dynamics with field data.
Ecology 87: 1478-1488. Abstract. Reprint (pdf).