Red herrings revisited: Spatial autocorrelation and parameter estimation in geographical ecology

Ecography

Volumn 30, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 375-384

  Hawkins, Bradford A ^a   Diniz Filho, José Alexandre F ^b   Mauricio Bini, Luis ^b   De Marco, Paulo ^b   Blackburn, Tim M ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF GOIÁS   (Brazil)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AUTOCORRELATION; AVIFAUNA; BIOGEOGRAPHY; DATA SET; LEAST SQUARES METHOD; MODEL; PARAMETERIZATION; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SPATIAL ANALYSIS; SPECIES RICHNESS;

AFRICA; AUSTRALASIA; AUSTRALIA; EURASIA; EUROPE; NORTH AMERICA; SOUTH AMERICA; USSR;

AVES; CLUPEIDAE;

EID: 34250017696     PISSN: 09067590     EISSN: 16000587     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.0906-7590.2007.05117.x     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Bahn, V. et al. 2006. Importance of spatial autocorrelation in modeling bird distributions at a continental scale Ecography 29 : 835 844.
2. Blackburn, T. M. Hawkins, B. A. 2004. Bergmann's rule and the mammal fauna of northern North America Ecography 27 : 715 724.
3. Cressie, N. A. C. 1993. Statistics for spatial data analysis. Wiley.
4. Currie, D. J. Paquin, V. 1987. Large-scale biogeographical patterns of species richness of trees Nature 329 : 326 327.
5. Diniz-Filho, J. A. F. et al. 2003. Spatial autocorrelation and red herrings in geographical ecology Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 12 : 53 64.
6. Dormann, C. F. 2007. Effects of incorporating spatial autocorrelation into the analysis of species distribution data Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 16 : 129 138.
7. Dutilleul, P. 1993. Modifying the t test for assessing the correlation between two spatial processes Biometrics 49 : 305 314.
8. Fotheringham, A. S. et al. 2002. Geographically weighted regression: the analysis of spatially varying relationships. Wiley.
9. Gimona, A. Brewer, M. J. 2006. Local environmental effects and spatial effects in macroecological studies using mapped abundance classes: the case of the rook Corvus frugilegus in Scotland J. Anim. Ecol. 75 : 1140 1146.
10. Graham, M. H. 2003. Confronting multicollinearity in ecological multiple regression Ecology 84 : 2809 2815.
11. Haining, R. 1990. Spatial data analysis in the social and environmental sciences. Cambridge Univ. Press.
12. Hawkins, B. A. Diniz-Filho, J. A. F. 2006. Beyond Rapoport's rule: evaluating range size patterns of New World birds in a two-dimensional framework Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 15 : 461 469.
13. Hawkins, B. A. et al. 2003. Productivity and history as predictors of the latitudinal diversity gradient of terrestrial birds Ecology 84 : 1608 1623.
14. Hawkins, B. A. et al. 2005. Water links the historical and contemporary components of the Australian bird diversity gradient J. Biogeogr. 32 : 1035 1042.
15. Hawkins, B. A. et al. 2007. Climate, niche conservatism, and the global bird diversity gradient. - Am. Nat., in press.
16. Kissling, W. D. and Carl, G. 2007. Spatial autocorrelation and the selection of simultaneous autoregressive models. - Global Ecol. Biogeogr., in press.
17. Kühn, I. 2007. Incorporating spatial autocorrelation may invert observed patterns Div. Distrib. 13 : 66 69.
18. Legendre, P. 1993. Spatial autocorrelation - trouble or new paradigm? Ecology 74 : 1659 1673.
19. Legendre, P. et al. 2002. The consequences of spatial structure for the design and analysis of ecological field surveys Ecography 25 : 601 615.
20. Lennon, J. J. 2000. Red-shifts and red herrings in geographical ecology Ecography 23 : 101 113.
21. Lennon, J. J. et al. 2000. Bird diversity and environmental gradients in Britain: a test of the species-energy hypothesis J. Anim. Ecol. 69 : 581 598.
22. Lichstein, J. W. et al. 2002. Spatial autocorrelation and autoregressive models in ecology Ecol. Monogr. 72 : 445 463.
23. Rahbek, C. Graves, G. R. 2001. Multiple scale assessment of patterns of avian species richness Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 98 : 4534 4539.
24. Rangel, T. F. L. V. B. et al. 2006. Towards an integrated computational tool for spatial analysis in macroecology and biogeography Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 15 : 321 431.
25. Ruggiero, A. et al. 1998. The geographic ranges of mammalian species in South America: spatial patterns in environmental resistance and anisotropy J. Biogeogr. 25 : 1093 1103.
26. Schabenberg, O. Gotway, C. A. 2005. Statistical methods for spatial data analysis. Chapman and Hall.
27. Selmi, S. Boulinier, T. 2001. Ecological biogeography of Southern Ocean islands: the importance of considering spatial issues Am. Nat. 158 : 426 437.
28. Tiefelsdorf, M. and Griffith, D. A. 2007. Semi-parametric filtering of spatial autocorrelation: the eigenvector approach. - Environ. Plann. A, in press.
29. Tognelli, M. F. Kelt, D. A. 2004. Analysis of determinants of mammalian species richness in South America using spatial autoregressive models Ecography 27 : 427 436.
30. Williams, P. H. et al. 1999. Interpreting biogeographical boundaries among Afrotropical birds: spatial patterns in richness gradients and species replacement J. Biogeogr. 26 : 459 474.
31. Willis, K. J. Whittaker, R. J. 2002. Species diversity - scale matters Science 295 : 1245 1248.