Self-similarity and the species - Area relation of Polish butterflies

Basic and Applied Ecology

Volumn 4, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 263-270

  Ulrich, Werner ^a   Buszko, Jarosław ^a  

^a NICOLAUS COPERNICUS UNIVERSITY   (Poland)

Author keywords

Area relation, self similarity, endemics; Area relation, species loss; Lepidoptera, butterflies, species

Indexed keywords

LEPIDOPTERA; PAPILIONOIDEA;

EID: 0038185255     PISSN: 14391791     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1078/1439-1791-00139     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Bell G (2000) The distribution of abundance in neutral communities. American Naturalist 155: 606-617.
2. Burslem DFRP, Garwood NC, Thomas SC (2001) Tropical forest diversity - the plot thickens. Science 291: 606-607.
3. Buszko J (1997) A distribution atlas of butterflies in Poland 1986-1995. Turpress, Toruń.
4. Buszko J, Kartanas E (1998) Internet database of Polish butterflies. http://motyle.biol.uni.torun.pl.
5. Carlson JM, Doyle J (1999) Highly optimised tolerance: a mechanism for power laws in designed systems. Physical Review Letters E 60: 1412-1427.
6. Carlson JM, Doyle J (2000) Highly optimized tolerance: robustness and design in complex systems. Physical Review Letters E 84: 2529-2532.
7. Colwell RK, Coddington J A (1994) Estimating terrestrial biodiversity through extrapolation - Philosophical Transactions Royal Society London B: 345: 101-118.
8. Fagan WF, Kareiva P (1997). Using compiled species lists to make biodiversity comparisons among regions: a test case study using Oregon butterflies. Biological Conservation 80: 249-259.
9. Finlay BJ, Esteban GF, Fenchel T (1998) Protozoan diversity: converging estimates of the global number of free-living ciliate species. Protist 149: 29-37.
10. Finlayson JC (1999) Species abundances across spatial scales. Science 283: 1979.
11. Hanski I, Gyllenberg M (1997) Uniting two general patterns in the distribution of species. Science 275: 397-400.
12. Harte J, Kinzig AP (1997) On the implications of species area relationships for endemism, spatial turnover, and food web patterns. Oikos 80: 417-427.
13. Harte J, Kinzig, AP, Green J (1999a) Self-similarity in the distribution and abundance of species. Science 284: 334-336.
14. Harte J, McCarthy S, Kinzig AP, Fischer ML (1999b) Estimating species - area relationships from plot to landscape scale using species spatial - turnover data. Oikos 86: 45-54
15. Holling CS (1992) Cross-scale morphology, geometry, and dynamics of ecosystems. Ecological Monographs 62: 447-502.
16. Karsholt O, Razowski J (1996) The Lepidoptera of Europe. Apollo Books, Stenstrup.
17. Kerr JT (1997) Species richness, endemism, and the choice of areas for conservation. Conservation Biology 11: 1094-1100.
18. Kinzig AP, Harte J (2000) Implications of endemics - area relationships for estimates of species extinction. Ecology 81: 3305-3311.
19. Kress WJ, Heyer WR, Acevedo P, Coddington J, Cole D, Erwin TL, Meggers BJ, Pogue M, Thorington RW, Vari RP, Weitzman MJ, Weitzmann SH (1998) Amazonian biodiversity: Assessing conservation priorities with taxonomic data. Biodiversity Conservation 7: 1577-1587.
20. Kunin WE (1998) Extrapolating species abundance across spatial scales. Science 281: 1513-1515.
21. Lande R, DeVries PJ, Walla TR (2000) When species accumulation curves intersect: implications for ranking diversity using small samples. Oikos 89: 601-605.
22. Lomolino MV (2000) Ecologist's most general, yet protean pattern: the species - area relationship. Journal of Biogeography 27: 17-26.
23. May RM (1975) Patterns of species abundance and diversity. In: Cody ML, Diamond JM (eds) Ecology and evolution of communities. Belknap, Cambridge, pp 81-120.
24. May RM, Lawton JH, Stork NE (1995) Assessing extinction rates. In: Lawton JH, May RM (eds) Extinction Rates. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, pp 1-24.
25. May RM, Stumpf MPH (2000) Species - area relations in tropical forests. Science 290: 2084-2086.
26. Moulliot D, Lepretre A, Andrei-Ruiz M-C, Viale D (2000) The fractal model: an new model to describe the species accumulation process and relative abundance distribution (RAD). Oikos 90: 333-342.
27. Ney-Nifle M, Mangel M (2000) Habitat loss and changes in the species-area relationship. Conservation Biology 14: 893-898.
28. Ostling A, Harte J, Green J (2000) Self-similarity and clustering in the spatial distribution of species. Science 290: 671.
29. Panzer R, Schwartz M (2000) Effects of management burning on prairie insect species richness within a system of small, highly fragmented reserves. Biological Conservation 96: 363-396.
30. Pimm SL, Askins RA (1995) Forest losses predict bird extinction in eastern North America. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 92: 9343-9347.
31. Pimm SL, Lawton JH (1998) Planning for biodiversity. Science 279: 2068-2069.
32. Plotkin JB., Potts MD, Yu DW, Bunyavejchewin S, Condit R, Foster R, Hubbell S, LaFranckie J, Manokaran N, Seng LH, Sukarmar R, Nowak MA, Ashton PS (2000a) Predicting species diversity in tropical forests - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 97: 10850-10854.
33. Plotkin JB, Potts MD, Leslie N, Manokaran N, LaFrankie J, Ashton PS (2000b) Species-area curves, spatial aggregation, and habitat specialization in tropical forests. Journal of Theoretical Biology 207: 81-99.
34. Preston FW (1962a). The canonical distribution of commonness and rarity, Part I. Ecology 43: 185-215.
35. Preston FW (1962b). The canonical distribution of commonness and rarity, Part II. Ecology 43: 410-432.
36. Rhode K (2001) Spatial scaling laws may not apply to most animal species. Oikos 93: 499-504.
37. Ricotta C, Carranza ML, Avena G (2002). Computing β-diversity from species-area curves. Basic Appl. Ecol. 3: 1-13.
38. Ritchie ME, Olff H (1999) Spatial scaling laws yield a synthetic theory of biodiversity. Nature 400: 557-560.
39. Romanuk TN, Kolasa J (2002) Species abundance distributions are not self-similar across spatial scales in aquatic microcosms. Ecography: submitted.
40. Rosenzweig ML (1995) Species diversity in space and time -Cambridge University Press.
41. Rosenzweig ML (2001) Loss of speciation rate will impoverish future diversity - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 98: 5404-5410.
42. z, z (1; a reply to Connor and McCoy. American Naturalist 117: 790-793.
43. Ulrich W (2001a) Hymenopteren in einem Kalkbuchenwald: Eine Modellgruppe zur Untersuchung von Tiergemeinschaften und ökologischen Raum-Zeit-Mustern. Schriftenreihe Forschzentrum Waldökosysteme A 171, Göttingen.
44. Ulrich W (2001b) Spatial scaling laws and weight dependent distributions in guilds of Diptera and parasitic Hymenoptera. Polish Journal Ecology 49: 59-66.
45. Ulrich W, Buszko J (2002) The Species - area relationship of butterflies in Europe I: The simulation of extinction processes reveals different patterns between Northern and Southern Europe. Ecography: submitted.
46. van Jaarsfeld AS, Freitag S, Chown SL, Muller C, Koch S, Hull H, Bellamy C, Krüger M, Enrödy-Younga S, Mansell MW, Scholtz CH (1998) Biodiversity assessment and conservation strategies. Science 279: 2106-2108.
47. Van Swaay C, Warren M (1999) Red Data Book of European Butterflies (Rhopalocera). Nature and Environment No. 99, Council of Europe Publ., Strasbourg.
48. Veech JA (2000) Choice of species-area function affects identification of hotspots. Conservation Biolology 14: 140-147.
49. Wilson EO (1992) The Diversity of Life. Norton, New York.
50. Zimmerman BL, Bierregaard RO (1986) Relevance of the equilibrium theory of island biogeography and species area relations to conservation with a case from Amazonia. Journal of Biogeography 13: 133-143.