A positive relationship between local abundance and regional occupancy is almost inevitable (but not all positive relationships are the same)

Journal of Animal Ecology

Volumn 67, Issue 6, 1998, Pages 992-994

  Hartley, Stephen ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Aggregation; Hypothesis testing; Metapopulation structure; Negative binomial distribution; Spatial structure

Indexed keywords

ABUNDANCE; SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 0031772794     PISSN: 00218790     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2656.1998.6760992.x     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Blackburn, T.M., Gaston, K.J., Quinn, R.M., Arnold, H. & Gregory, R.D. (1997) Of mice and wrens: the relation between abundance and geographic range size in British mammals and birds. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society London B, 352, 419-427.
2. Bliss, C.I. & Fisher, R.A. (1953) Fitting the negative binomial distribution to biological data. Note on the efficient fitting of the negative binomial. Biometrics, 9, 176-200.
3. Bock, C.E. & Ricklefs, R.E. (1983) Range size and local abundance of some North American songbirds: a positive correlation. American Naturalist, 122, 295-299.
4. Brown, J.H. (1984) On the relationship between abundance and distribution of species. American Naturalist, 124, 255-279.
5. Cornell, H.V. (1982) The notion of minimum distance or why rare species are clumped. Oecologia, 52, 278-280.
6. Gaston, K.J. (1994) Rarity. Chapman & Hall, London.
7. Gaston, K.J. (1996) The multiple forms of the interspecific abundance-distribution relationship. Oikos, 76, 211-220.
8. Gaston, K.J., Blackburn, T.M. & Lawton, J.H. (1997) Interspecific abundance-range size relationships: an appraisal of mechanisms. Journal of Animal Ecology, 66, 579-601.
9. Gaston, K.J. & Lawton, J.H. (1990) Effects of scale and habitat on the relationship between regional distribution and local abundance. Oikos, 58, 329-335.
10. Hanski, I., Kouki, J. & Halkka, A. (1993) Three explanations of the positive relationship between distribution and abundance of species. Species Diversity in Ecological Communities: historical and geographical perspectives (eds R.E. Ricklefs & D. Schluter), pp. 108-116. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
11. Hulbert, S.H. (1990) Spatial distribution of the montane unicorn. Oikos, 58, 257-271.
12. Jaenike, J. & James, A.C. (1991) Aggregation and the coexistence of mycophagous Drosophila. Journal of Animal Ecology, 60, 913-928.
13. Legendre, P. (1993) Spatial autocorrelation: trouble or new paradigm? Ecology, 75, 1659-1673.
14. Rosewell, J., Shorrocks, B. & Edwards, K., (1990) Competition on a divided and ephemeral resource: testing the assumptions. I. Aggregation. Journal of Animal Ecology, 59, 977-1001.
15. Southwood, T.R.E. (1978) Ecological Methods. Chapman and Hall, London.
16. Taylor, L.R., Woiwood, I.P. & Perry, J.N. (1978) The density dependence of spatial behaviour and the rarity of randomness. Journal of Animal Ecology, 47, 383-406.
17. Warren, P.H. & Gaston, K.J. (1997) Interspecific abundance occupancy relationships: a test of mechanisms using microcosms. Journal of Animal Ecology, 66, 730-742.
18. Wright, D.H. (1991) Correlations between incidence and abundance are expected by chance. Journal of Biogeography, 18, 463-466.