text:
Niche differentiation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The term niche differentiation (synonymous with niche segregation, niche separation and niche partitioning), as it applies to the field of ecology, refers to the process by which competing species use the environment differently in a way that helps them to coexist. The competitive exclusion principle states that if two species with identical niches (i.e., ecological roles) compete, then one will inevitably drive the other to extinction.[1] When two species differentiate their niches, they tend to compete less strongly, and are thus more likely to coexist. Species can differentiate their niches in many ways, such as by consuming different foods, or using different parts of the environment.
As an example of niche partitioning, several Anolis lizards in the Caribbean islands share common food needs—mainly insects. They avoid competition by occupying different physical locations. For example, some live on the leaf litter floor while others live on branches. Species who live in different areas compete less for food and other resources, which minimizes competition between species. However, species who live in similar areas compete strongly.[2]
Contents
[hide]
1 Detection and quantification
2 Development
2.1 Current competition (The Ghost of Competition Present)
2.2 Via past extinctions (The Ghost of Competition Past)
2.3 Evolving differences
3 Types
3.1 Resource partitioning
3.2 Predator partitioning
3.3 Conditional differentiation
3.4 Competition-predation trade-off
4 Coexistence without niche differentiation: exceptions to the rule
5 See also
6 References
7 Further reading
8 External links
Detection and quantification[edit]
The Lotka-Volterra equation states that two competing species can coexist when intra-specific (within species) competition is greater than inter-specific (between species) competition (Armstrong and McGehee 1981). Since niche differentiation concentrates competition within-species, due to a decrease in between-species competition, the Lotka-Volterra model predicts that niche differentiation of any degree will result in coexistence.
In reality, this still leaves the question of how much differentiation is needed for coexistence (Hutchinson 1959). A vague answer to this question is that the more similar two species are, the more finely balanced the suitability of their environment must be in order to allow coexistence. There are limits to the amount of niche differentiation required for coexistence, and this can vary with the type of resource, the nature of the environment, and the amount of variation both within and between the species.
To answer questions about niche differentiation, it is necessary for ecologists to be able to detect, measure, and quantify the niches of different coexisting and competing species. This is often done through a combination of detailed natural history studies, controlled experiments (to determine the strength of competition), and mathematical models (Strong 1982, Leibold 1995). To understand the mechanisms of niche differentiation and competition, much data must be gathered on how the two species interact, how they use their resources, and the type of ecosystem in which they exist, among other factors. In addition, several mathematical models exist to quantify niche breadth, competition, and coexistence (Bastolla et al. 2005). However, regardless of methods used, niches and competition can be distinctly difficult to measure quantitatively, and this makes detection and demonstration of niche differentiation difficult and complex.
Development[edit]
Over time, two competing species can either coexist, through niche differentiation or other means, or compete until one species becomes locally extinct. Several theories exist for how niche differentiation arises or evolves given these two possible outcomes.
Current competition (The Ghost of Competition Present)[edit]
Niche differentiation can arise from current competition. For instance, species X has a fundamental niche of the entire slope of a hillside, but its realized niche is only the top portion of the slope because species Y, which is a better competitor but cannot survive on the top portion of the slope, has excluded it from the lower portion of the slope. With this scenario, competition will continue indefinitely in the middle of the slope between these two species. Because of this, detection of the presence of niche differentiation (through competition) will be relatively easy. It is also important to remember that there is no evolutionary change of the individual species in this case; rather this is an ecological effect of species Y out-competing species X within the bounds of species Y's fundamental niche.
Via past extinctions (The Ghost of Competition Past)[edit]
Another way by which niche differentiation can arise is via the previous elimination of species without realized niches. This asserts that at some point in the past, several species inhabited an area, and all of these species had overlapping fundamental niches. However, through competitive exclusion, the less competitive species were eliminated, leaving only the species that were able to coexist (i.e. the most competitive species whose realized niches did not overlap). Again, this process does not include any evolutionary change of individual species, but it is merely the product of the competitive exclusion principle. Also, because no species is out-competing any other species in the final community, the presence of niche differentiation will be difficult or impossible to detect.
Evolving differences[edit]
Finally, niche differentiation can arise as an evolutionary effect of competition. In this case, two competing species will evolve different patterns of resource use so as to avoid competition. Here too, current competition is absent or low, and therefore detection of niche differentiation is difficult or impossible.
Types[edit]
Below is a list of ways that species can partition their niche. This list is not exhaustive, but illustrates several classic examples.
Resource partitioning[edit]
When species use different resources, this can help them to coexist. For example, some lizard species appear to coexist because they consume insects of differing sizes.[3] Alternatively, species can coexist on the same resources if each species is limited by different resources, or differently able to capture resources. For example, different types of phytoplankton can coexist when different species are differently limited by nitrogen, phosphorus, silicon, and light.[4] In the Galapagos Islands, finches with small beaks are more able to consume small seeds, and finches with large beaks are more able to consume large seeds. If a species' density declines, then the food it most depends on will become more abundant (since there are so few individuals to consume it). As a result, the remaining individuals will experience less competition for food.
Although "resource" generally refers to food, species can partition other non-consumable objects, such as parts of the habitat. For example, warblers are thought to coexist because they nest in different parts of trees.[5] Species can also partition habitat in a way that gives them access to different types of resources. As stated in the introduction, anolis lizards appear to coexist because each uses different parts of the forests as perch locations.[2] This likely gives them access to different species of insects.
Predator partitioning[edit]
Predator partitioning occurs when species are attacked differently by different predators (or natural enemies more generally). For example, trees could differentiate their niche if they are consumed by different species of specialist herbivores, such as herbivorous insects. If a species density declines, so too will the density of its natural enemies, giving it an advantage. Thus, if each species is constrained by different natural enemies, they will be able to coexist.[6] Early work focused on specialist predators;[6] however, more recent studies have shown that predators do not need to be pure specialists, they simply need to affect each prey species differently.[7][8] The Janzen–Connell hypothesis represents a form of predator partitioning.[9]
Conditional differentiation[edit]
Conditional differentiation (sometimes called temporal niche partitioning) occurs when species differ in their competitive abilities based on varying environmental conditions. For example, in the Sonoran Desert, some annual plants are more successful during wet years, while others are more successful during dry years.[10] As a result, each species will have an advantage in some years, but not others. When environmental conditions are most favorable, individuals will tend to compete most strongly with member of the same species. For example, in a dry year, dry-adapted plants will tend to be most limited by other dry-adapted plants.[10] This can help them to coexist through a storage effect.
Competition-predation trade-off[edit]
Species can differentiate their niche via a competition-predation trade-off if one species is a better competitor when predators are absent, and the other is better when predators are present. Defenses against predators, such as toxic compounds or hard shells, are often metabolically costly. As a result, species that produce such defenses are often poor competitors when predators are absent. Species can coexist through a competition-predation trade-off if predators are more abundant when the less defended species is common, and less abundant if the well-defended species is common.[11] This effect has been criticized as being weak, because theoretical models suggest that only two species within a community can coexist because of this mechanism.[12]
Coexistence without niche differentiation: exceptions to the rule[edit]
Some competing species have been shown to coexist on the same resource with no observable evidence of niche differentiation and in “violation” of the competitive exclusion principle. One instance is in a group of hispine beetle species (Strong 1982). These beetle species, which eat the same food and occupy the same habitat, coexist without any evidence of segregation or exclusion. The beetles show no aggression either intra- or inter-specifically. Coexistence may be possible through a combination of non-limiting food and habitat resources and high rates of predation and parasitism, though this has not been demonstrated.
This example illustrates that the evidence for niche differentiation is by no means universal. Niche differentiation is also not the only means by which coexistence is possible between two competing species (see Shmida and Ellner 1984). However, niche differentiation is a critically important ecological idea which explains species coexistence, thus promoting the high biodiversity often seen in many of the world's biomes.
Research using mathematical modelling is indeed demonstrating that predation can indeed stabilize lumps of very similar species. Willow warbler and chiffchaff and other very similar warblers can serve as an example. The idea is that it is also a good strategy to be very similar to a successful species or have enough dissimilarity. Also trees in the rain forest can serve as an example of all high canopy species basically following the same strategy. Other examples of nearly identical species clusters occupying the same niche were water beetles, prairie birds and algae.The basic idea is that there can be clusters of very similar species all applying the same successful strategy and between them open spaces. Here the species cluster takes the place of a single species in the classical ecological models.[13]
See also[edit]
Phylogenetic niche conservatism
References[edit]
Jump up ^ Hardin, Garrett (29 April 1960). "The Competitive Exclusion Principle". Science. 131 (3409): 1292–1297. PMID 14399717. doi:10.1126/science.131.3409.1292.
^ Jump up to: a b Pacala, Stephen W.; Roughgarden, Jonathan (February 1985). "Population Experiments with the Anolis Lizards of St. Maarten and St. Eustatius". Ecology. 66 (1): 129–141. doi:10.2307/1941313.
Jump up ^ Caldwell, Janalee P; Vitt, Laurie J (1999). "Dietary asymmetry in leaf litter frogs and lizards in a transitional northern Amazonian rain forest". Oikos. 84 (3): 383–397. doi:10.2307/3546419.
Jump up ^ Grover, James P. (1997). Resource competition (1st ed.). London: Chapman & Hall. ISBN 0412749300.
Jump up ^ MacArthur, Robert H. (October 1958). "Population Ecology of Some Warblers of Northeastern Coniferous Forests". Ecology. 39 (4): 599–619. doi:10.2307/1931600.
^ Jump up to: a b Grover, James (1994). "Assembly Rules for Communities of Nutrient-Limited Plants and Specialist Herbivores". The American Naturalist. 143 (2): 258–282. doi:10.2307/2462643.
Jump up ^ Chesson, Peter; Kuang, Jessica J. (13 November 2008). "The interaction between predation and competition". Nature. 456 (7219): 235–238. PMID 19005554. doi:10.1038/nature07248.
Jump up ^ Sedio, Brian E.; Ostling, Annette M.; Ris Lambers, Janneke Hille (August 2013). "How specialised must natural enemies be to facilitate coexistence among plants?". Ecology Letters. 16 (8): 995–1003. doi:10.1111/ele.12130.
Jump up ^ Gilbert, Gregory (2005). Burlesem, David; Pinard, Michelle; Hartley, Sue, eds. Biotic interactions in the tropics: their role in the maintenance of species diversity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. pp. 141–164. ISBN 9780521609852.
^ Jump up to: a b Angert, Amy L.; Huxman, Travis E.; Chesson, Peter; Venable, D. Lawrence (14 July 2009). "Functional tradeoffs determine species coexistence via the storage effect". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 106 (28): 11641–11645. PMC 2710622  . PMID 19571002. doi:10.1073/pnas.0904512106.
Jump up ^ Holt, Robert D.; Grover, James; Tilman, David (November 1994). "Simple Rules for Interspecific Dominance in Systems with Exploitative and Apparent Competition". The American Naturalist. 144 (5): 741–771. doi:10.1086/285705.
Jump up ^ Chase, Jonathan M.; Abrams, Peter A.; Grover, James P.; Diehl, Sebastian; Chesson, Peter; Holt, Robert D.; Richards, Shane A.; Nisbet, Roger M.; Case, Ted J. (March 2002). "The interaction between predation and competition: a review and synthesis". Ecology Letters. 5 (2): 302–315. doi:10.1046/j.1461-0248.2002.00315.x.
Jump up ^ Scheffer, M, Nes, E, Self-organized similarity, the evolutionary emergence of groups of similar species Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, April 18, 2006 vol. 103 no. 16 6230-6235
Further reading[edit]
Armstrong, R.A., McGehee, R. (1980). "Competitive exclusion". American Naturalist. 115 (2): 151–170. doi:10.1086/283553. CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list (link)
Bastolla, U., Lässig, M., Manrubia, S.C., Valleriani, A. (August 2005). "Biodiversity in model ecosystems, I: coexistence conditions for competing species". J. Theor. Biol. 235 (4): 521–30. PMID 15935170. doi:10.1016/j.jtbi.2005.02.005. CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list (link)
Hutchinson, G.E. (1959). "Homage to Santa Rosalia or Why are there so many kinds of animals?". American Naturalist. 93 (870): 145–159. doi:10.1086/282070.
Kronfeld-Schor, N., Dayan, T. (1999). "The dietary basis for temporal partitioning: food habits of coexisting Acomys species". Oecologia. 121: 123–8. doi:10.1007/s004420050913. CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list (link)
Lawler, S.P., Morin, P.J. (1993). "Temporal overlap, competition, and priority effects in larval anurans". Ecology. 74 (1): 174–182. JSTOR 1939512. doi:10.2307/1939512. CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list (link)
Leibold, M.A. (1995). "The niche concept revisited: mechanistic models and community context". Ecology. 76 (5): 1371–82. JSTOR 1938141. doi:10.2307/1938141.
Pyke, G.H. (1982). "Local geographic distributions of bumblebees near Crested Butte, Colorado: competition and community structure". Ecology. 63 (2): 555–573. JSTOR 1938970. doi:10.2307/1938970.
Shmida, A., Ellner, S. (1984). "Coexistence of plant species with similar niches". Vegetatio. 58: 29–55. CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list (link)
Strong, D.R.J. (1982). "Harmonious coexistence of hispine beetles on Heliconia in experimental and natural communities". Ecology. 63 (4): 1039–49. JSTOR 1937243. doi:10.2307/1937243.
Tilman, D. (1990). "Mechanisms of plant competition for nutrients: the elements of a predictive theory of competition". In Grace, J.B.; Tilman, D. Perspectives on Plant Competition. New York: Academic Press. pp. 117–141.
External links[edit]
More information on resource partitioning
Walter, G.H. (May 1991). "What is resource partitioning?". J. Theor. Biol. 150 (2): 137–43. PMID 1890851. doi:10.1016/S0022-5193(05)80327-3.
Department of Entomology, University of Queensland, Australia.
[show]
v
t
e
Ecology: Modelling ecosystems: Trophic components
General
Abiotic component
Abiotic stress
Behaviour
Biogeochemical cycle
Biomass
Biotic component
Biotic stress
Carrying capacity
Competition
Ecosystem
Ecosystem ecology
Ecosystem model
Keystone species
List of feeding behaviours
Metabolic theory of ecology
Productivity
Resource
Producers
Autotrophs
Chemosynthesis
Chemotrophs
Foundation species
Mixotrophs
Myco-heterotrophy
Mycotroph
Organotrophs
Photoheterotrophs
Photosynthesis
Photosynthetic efficiency
Phototrophs
Primary nutritional groups
Primary production
Consumers
Apex predator
Bacterivore
Carnivores
Chemoorganotroph
Foraging
Generalist and specialist species
Intraguild predation
Herbivores
Heterotroph
Heterotrophic nutrition
Insectivore
Mesopredators
Mesopredator release hypothesis
Omnivores
Optimal foraging theory
Predation
Prey switching
Decomposers
Chemoorganoheterotrophy
Decomposition
Detritivores
Detritus
Microorganisms
Archaea
Bacteriophage
Environmental microbiology
Lithoautotroph
Lithotrophy
Microbial cooperation
Microbial ecology
Microbial food web
Microbial intelligence
Microbial loop
Microbial mat
Microbial metabolism
Phage ecology
Food webs
Biomagnification
Ecological efficiency
Ecological pyramid
Energy flow
Food chain
Trophic level
Example webs
Cold seeps
Hydrothermal vents
Intertidal
Kelp forests
Lakes
North Pacific Subtropical Gyre
Rivers
San Francisco Estuary
Soil
Tide pool
Processes
Ascendency
Bioaccumulation
Cascade effect
Climax community
Competitive exclusion principle
Consumer-resource systems
Copiotrophs
Dominance
Ecological network
Ecological succession
Energy quality
Energy Systems Language
f-ratio
Feed conversion ratio
Feeding frenzy
Mesotrophic soil
Nutrient cycle
Oligotroph
Paradox of the plankton
Trophic cascade
Trophic mutualism
Trophic state index
Defense/counter
Animal coloration
Antipredator adaptations
Camouflage
Deimatic behaviour
Herbivore adaptations to plant defense
Mimicry
Plant defense against herbivory
Predator avoidance in schooling fish
[hide]
v
t
e
Ecology: Modelling ecosystems: Other components
Population ecology
Abundance
Allee effect
Depensation
Ecological yield
Effective population size
Intraspecific competition
Logistic function
Malthusian growth model
Maximum sustainable yield
Overpopulation in wild animals
Overexploitation
Population cycle
Population dynamics
Population modeling
Population size
Predator–prey (Lotka–Volterra) equations
Recruitment
Resilience
Small population size
Stability
Species
Biodiversity
Density-dependent inhibition
Ecological effects of biodiversity
Ecological extinction
Endemic species
Flagship species
Gradient analysis
Indicator species
Introduced species
Invasive species
Latitudinal gradients in species diversity
Minimum viable population
Neutral theory
Occupancy–abundance relationship
Population viability analysis
Priority effect
Rapoport's rule
Relative abundance distribution
Relative species abundance
Species diversity
Species homogeneity
Species richness
Species distribution
Species-area curve
Umbrella species
Species interaction
Antibiosis
Biological interaction
Commensalism
Community ecology
Ecological facilitation
Interspecific competition
Mutualism
Storage effect
Spatial ecology
Biogeography
Cross-boundary subsidy
Ecocline
Ecotone
Ecotype
Disturbance
Edge effects
Foster's rule
Habitat fragmentation
Ideal free distribution
Intermediate Disturbance Hypothesis
Island biogeography
Landscape ecology
Landscape epidemiology
Landscape limnology
Metapopulation
Patch dynamics
r/K selection theory
Source–sink dynamics
Niche
Ecological niche
Ecological trap
Ecosystem engineer
Environmental niche modelling
Guild
Habitat
Marine habitats
Limiting similarity
Niche apportionment models
Niche construction
Niche differentiation
Other networks
Assembly rules
Bateman's principle
Bioluminescence
Ecological collapse
Ecological debt
Ecological deficit
Ecological energetics
Ecological indicator
Ecological threshold
Ecosystem diversity
Emergence
Extinction debt
Kleiber's law
Liebig's law of the minimum
Marginal value theorem
Thorson's rule
Xerosere
Other
Allometry
Alternative stable state
Balance of nature
Biological data visualization
Constructal theory
Ecocline
Ecological economics
Ecological footprint
Ecological forecasting
Ecological humanities
Ecological stoichiometry
Ecopath
Ecosystem based fisheries
Endolith
Evolutionary ecology
Functional ecology
Industrial ecology
Macroecology
Microecosystem
Natural environment
Regime shift
Systems ecology
Urban ecology
Theoretical ecology
List of ecology topics
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Niche_differentiation&oldid=805658990"
Categories:
Ecological niche
Hidden categories:
CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Català
Ελληνικά
Français
Português
Edit links
This page was last edited on 16 October 2017, at 20:30.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

values: Edit section: Detection and quantification

values:
/wiki/Lotka-Volterra_equation
mw-redirect
Lotka-Volterra equation

values:
/wiki/Mathematical_models
mw-redirect
Mathematical models

values: Edit section: Current competition (The Ghost of Competition Present)

values: Edit section: Via past extinctions (The Ghost of Competition Past)

values:
/wiki/Galapagos_Islands
mw-redirect
Galapagos Islands

values:
/wiki/Natural_enemy
mw-redirect
Natural enemy

values:
/wiki/Specialist_predator
mw-redirect
Specialist predator

values: Edit section: Conditional differentiation

values: Edit section: Competition-predation trade-off

values: Edit section: Coexistence without niche differentiation: exceptions to the rule

values:
/wiki/PubMed_Identifier
mw-redirect
PubMed Identifier

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14399717

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.2307%2F1941313

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.2307%2F3546419

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.2307%2F1931600

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.2307%2F2462643

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19005554

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1038%2Fnature07248

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1111%2Fele.12130

attrs: alt src title width height srcset data-file-width data-file-height

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19571002

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1073%2Fpnas.0904512106

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1086%2F285705

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1086%2F283553

values: Category:CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15935170

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.jtbi.2005.02.005

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1086%2F282070

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1007%2Fs004420050913

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.jstor.org/stable/1939512

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.2307%2F1939512

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.jstor.org/stable/1938141

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.2307%2F1938141

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.jstor.org/stable/1938970

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.2307%2F1938970

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.jstor.org/stable/1937243

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.2307%2F1937243

values: refbegin columns references-column-count references-column-count-2

values: -moz-column-count: 2; -webkit-column-count: 2; column-count: 2;

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1890851

values:
/wiki/Consumers_(food_chain)
mw-redirect
Consumers (food chain)

values:
/wiki/Environmental_microbiology
mw-redirect
Environmental microbiology

values:
/wiki/North_Pacific_Subtropical_Gyre
mw-redirect
North Pacific Subtropical Gyre

values:
/wiki/Antipredator_adaptation
mw-redirect
Antipredator adaptation

values: nowraplinks hlist collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner

values:
/wiki/Overpopulation_in_wild_animals
mw-redirect
Overpopulation in wild animals

values:
/wiki/Population_modeling
mw-redirect
Population modeling

values:
/wiki/Resilience_(ecology)
mw-redirect
Resilience (ecology)

values:
/wiki/Endemic_species
mw-redirect
Endemic species

values:
/wiki/Gradient_analysis
mw-redirect
Gradient analysis

values: Latitudinal gradients in species diversity

values:
/wiki/Species-area_curve
mw-redirect
Species-area curve

values:
/wiki/Community_ecology
mw-redirect
Community ecology

values:
/wiki/Island_biogeography
mw-redirect
Island biogeography

values:
/wiki/Ecological_deficit
mw-redirect
Ecological deficit

values:
/wiki/Ecological_energetics
mw-redirect
Ecological energetics

values:
/wiki/Constructal_theory
mw-redirect
Constructal theory

values:
/wiki/Ecosystem_based_fisheries
mw-redirect
Ecosystem based fisheries

values:
/wiki/List_of_ecology_topics
mw-redirect
List of ecology topics

values: nowraplinks hlist collapsible uncollapsed navbox-inner

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values:
/wiki/Niche_differentiation
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Find background information on current events

values: About the project, what you can do, where to find things

values: A list of recent changes in the wiki [ctrl-alt-r]

values: portal navigation p-interaction p-interaction-label

values: List of all English Wikipedia pages containing links to this page [ctrl-alt-j]

values: Recent changes in pages linked from this page [ctrl-alt-k]

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard
Upload files [ctrl-alt-u]
u

values: A list of all special pages [ctrl-alt-q]

values: Permanent link to this revision of the page

values: Link to connected data repository item [ctrl-alt-g]

values: Printable version of this page [ctrl-alt-p]

values:
uls-settings-trigger
Language settings
0
button
true

values: Διαφοροποίηση θώκων – Greek

values: /static/images/wikimedia-button-1.5x.png 1.5x, /static/images/wikimedia-button-2x.png 2x

values: /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_132x47.png 1.5x, /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_176x62.png 2x

values:
suggestions
display: none; font-size: 13px;

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Niche_differentiation rootpage-Niche_differentiation vector-experimental-print-styles vector-nav-directionality skin-vector action-view