Veg-X - an exchange standard for plot-based vegetation data

Journal of Vegetation Science

Volumn 22, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 598-609

  Wiser, Susan K ^a   Spencer, Nick ^a   de Cáceres, Miquel ^b   Kleikamp, Martin ^c   Boyle, Brad ^d   Peet, Robert K ^e  

^a LANDCARE RESEARCH   (New Zealand)

^b Centre Tecnologic Forestal de Catalunya   (Spain)

^c The University of Arizona Herbarium ^*  (Germany)

^d University of Arizona   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

Data exchange; Data standard; Ecoinformatics; Relev ; Taxonomic concept; Vegetation plot

Indexed keywords

BIOINFORMATICS; CONFERENCE PROCEEDING; DATA SET; DATABASE; ECOLOGICAL MODELING; SAMPLING; SOFTWARE; STANDARD (REFERENCE); TAXONOMY; TERMINOLOGY; VEGETATION DYNAMICS; VEGETATION STRUCTURE;

EID: 79960100291     PISSN: 11009233     EISSN: 16541103     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1654-1103.2010.01245.x     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Berendsohn, W.G. 1995. The concept of "potential taxa" in databases. Taxon 44: 207-212.
2. Boyle, B., Meyer, H.W., Enquist, B.J. & Salas, S. 2008. Higher taxa as paleoecological and paleoclimatic indicators: a search for the modern analog of the Florissant fossil flora. Geological Society of America Special Paper 435: 33-51.
3. Chrisman, N.R. 1994. Metadata required to determine the fitness of spatial data for use in environmental analysis. In: Michener, W.K., Brunt, J.W. & Stafford, S.G. (eds.) Environmental information management and analysis: ecosystems to global scales. pp. 177-190. Taylor & Francis, London, UK.
4. Colwell, R.K. 1995. Ecological Society of America special committee on ESA communications in the electronic age. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America 76: 120-131.
5. Condit, R. 1998. Tropical forest census plots: methods and results from Barro Colorado Island, Panama and a comparison with other plots. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, DE.
6. Conley, W. & Brunt, J.W. 1991. An institute for theoretical ecology? Part V: practical data management for cross-site analysis and synthesis of ecological information. Coenoses 6: 173-180.
7. Dengler, J. 2003. Entwicklung und Bewertung neuer Ansätze in der Pflanzensoziologie unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Vegetationsklassifikation [Archiv naturwissenschaftlicher Dissertationen no. 14]. Galunder, Nümbrecht, DE.
8. Dengler, J., Chytrý, M., Ewald, J., Glöckler, F., Jansen, F., De Cáceres, M., Finckh, M., Hennekens, S.M., Mucina, L., Oldeland, J., Peet, R.K., Rodwell, J.S., Schaminée, J.H.J. & Spencer, N. 2011. The Global Index of Vegetation-Plot Databases (GIVD): a new resource for vegetation science. Journal of Vegetation Science 21, doi: DOI: 10.1111/j.1654-1103.2011.01265.x.
9. Dresser, R. 2000. Accountability in science and government: is access the answer? Hasting Center Report 2000 (May-June): 29-30.
10. Edwards, J.L., Lane, M.A. & Nielsen, E.S. 2000. Interoperability of biodiversity databases: biodiversity information on every desktop. Science 289: 2312-2314.
11. Ellison, A.M. 2010. Repeatability and transparency in ecological research. Ecology 91: 2536-2539.
12. Enquist, B.J. & Niklas, K.J. 2001. Invariant scaling relations across tree-dominated communities. Nature 410: 655-660.
13. Fernald, M.L. 1950. Gray's Manual of Botany. 8 ed. American Book Co., New York, NY, US.
14. Frankel, M.S. 1999. Public access to data. Science 283: 1114.
15. Franz, N.M. & Peet, R.K. 2009. Towards a language for mapping relationships among taxonomic concepts. Systematics and Biodiversity 7: 5-20.
16. Franz, N.M., Peet, R.K. & Weakley, A.S. 2008. On the use of taxonomic concepts in support of biodiversity research and taxonomy. Symposium proceedings. In: Wheeler, Q.D. (ed.) The new taxonomy. pp. 63-86. [Systematics Association Special Volume 74.] Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton, FL, US.
17. Fridley, J.D., Vandermast, D.B., Kuppinger, D.M., Manthey, M. & Peet, R.K. 2007. Co-occurrence-based assessment of habitat generalists and specialists: a new approach for the measurement of niche width. Journal of Ecology 95: 707-722.
18. Gillet, F. & Gallandat, J.D. 1996. Integrated synusial phytosociology: some notes on a new, multiscalar approach to vegetation analysis. Journal of Vegetation Science 7: 13-18.
19. Gleason, H.J. 1952. The new Britton and Brown illustrated flora of the Northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. Hafner Press, New York, NY, US.
20. Gosling, W., Mayle, F., Tate, N. & Killeen, T. 2009. Differentiation between Neotropical rainforest, dry forest, and savannah ecosystems by their modern pollen spectra and implications for the fossil pollen record. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 153: 70-85.
21. Hale, S.S. 2000. How to manage data badly (part 2). Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America 81: 101-103.
22. Hale, S.S., Miglarese, A.H., Bradley, M.P., Belton, T.J., Cooper, L.D., Frame, M.T., Friel, C.A., Harwell, L.M., King, R.E., Michener, W.K., Nicolson, D.T. & Peterjohn, B.G. 2003. Managing troubled data: coastal data partnerships smooth data integration. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 81: 133-148.
23. Hall, G.M.J., Wiser, S.K., Allen, R.B., Beets, P.N. & Goulding, C.J. 2001. Strategies to estimate national carbon biomass from forest inventory data: the 1990 New Zealand baseline. Global Change Biology 7: 389-403.
24. Hennekens, S.M. & Schaminée, J.H.J. 2001. Turboveg, a comprehensive database management system for vegetation data. Journal of Vegetation Science 12: 589-591.
25. Hurst, J.M. & Allen, R.B. 2007. A permanent plot method for monitoring indigenous forests - field protocols. Manaaki Whenua - Landcare Research, Lincoln, NZ.
26. Jansen, F. & Dengler, J. 2010. Plant names in vegetation databases - a neglected source of bias. Journal of Vegetation Science 21: 1179-1186.
27. Jennings, M.D., Faber-Langendoen, D., Loucks, O.L., Peet, R.K. & Roberts, D. 2009. Standards for associations and alliances of the U.S. national vegetation classification. Ecological Monographs 79: 173-199.
28. Jones, M.B., Schildhauer, M.P., Reichman, O.J. & Bowers, S. 2006. The new bioinformatics: integrating ecological data from the gene to the biosphere. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 37: 519-544.
29. Kartesz, J. 1999. Synthesis of the North American flora. North Carolina Botanical Garden, Chapel Hill, NC, US.
30. Kennedy, J., Kukla, R. & Paterson, T. 2005. Scientific names are ambiguous as identifiers for biological taxa: their context and definition are required for accurate data integration. In: Ludäscher, B. & Raschid, L. (eds.) Data integration in the life sciences: Proceedings of the Second International Workshop. San Diego, CA, July 20-22, 2005. DILS LNBI 3615, 2005, 80-95.
31. Malhi, Y., Phillips, O.L., Lloyd, J., Baker, T.R., Wright, J., Almeida, S., Arroyo, L., Frederiksen, T., Grace, J., Higuchi, N., Killeen, T., Laurance, W.F., Leaño, C., Lewis, S.L., Meir, P., Monteagudo, A., Neill, D., Núñez Vargas, P., Panfil, S.N., Patiño, S., Pitman, N., Quesada, C.A., Rudas-Ll, A., Salomão, R., Saleska, S., Silva, N., Silveira, M., Sombroek, W.G., Valencia, R., Vásquez Martínez, R., Vieira, I.C.G. & Vinceti, B. 2002. An international network to monitor the structure, composition and dynamics of Amazonian forests (RAINFOR). Journal of Vegetation Science 13: 439-450.
32. Michener, W.K. 1998. Ecological metadata. In: Michener, W.K., Porter, J.H. & Stafford, S.G. (eds.) Data and information management in the ecological sciences: a resource guide. pp. 47-51. Long Term Ecological Research Network Office, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, US.
33. Michener, W.K., Brunt, J.W., Helly, J.J., Kirchner, T.B. & Stafford, S.G. 1997. Nongeospatial metadata for the ecological sciences. Ecological Applications 7: 330-342.
34. Mucina, L., Schaminée, J.H.J. & Rodwell, J.S. 2000. Common data standards for recording relevés in field survey for vegetation classification. Journal of Vegetation Science 11: 769-772.
35. Mueller-Dombois, D. & Ellenberg, H. 1974. Aims and methods of vegetation ecology. John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY, US.
36. Olson, R.J. & McCord, R.A. 2000. Archiving ecological data and information. In: Michener, W.K. & Brunt, J.W. (eds.) Ecological data: design, management and processing. Blackwell Science, Oxford, UK.
37. Nelson, B. 2009. Empty archives. Nature 461: 160-163.
38. Parr, C.S. & Cummings, M.P. 2005. Data sharing in ecology and evolution. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20: 362-363.
39. Peet, R.K., Wentworth, T.R. & White, P.S. 1998. A flexible, multipurpose method for recording vegetation composition and structure. Castanea 63: 262-274.
40. Piwowar, H.A., Day, R.S. & Fridsma, B. 2007. Sharing detailed research data is associated with increased citation rate. PLoS ONE 2: e308, doi: DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0000308.
41. Porter, J.H. & Callahan, J.T. 1994. Circumventing a dilemma: historical approaches to data sharing in ecological research. In: Michener, W.K., Brunt, J.W. & Stafford, S.G. (eds.) Environmental information management and analysis: ecosystems to global scales. pp. 193-202. Taylor & Francis, London, UK.
42. Russo, S.E., Jenkins, K.L., Wiser, S.K., Uriarte, M., Duncan, R.P. & Coomes, D.A. 2010. Interspecific relationships among growth, mortality, and xylem traits of 59 woody species from New Zealand. Functional Ecology 24: 253-262.
43. Schaminée, J.H.J., Hennekens, S.M., Chytry, M. & Rodwell, J.S. 2009. Vegetation-plot data and databases in Europe: an overview. Preslia 81: 173-185.
44. Schnitzer, S.A. & Bonger, F. 2002. The ecology of lianas and their role in forests. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 17: 223-230.
45. Stafford, S.G. 1993. Data, data everywhere but not a byte to read: managing monitoring information. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 26: 1125-1141.
46. Stone, D. 1997. Carya. In: Flora of North America Editorial Committee. (ed.) Flora of North America North of Mexico. 3. pp. 416-425. Oxford University Press, New York, NY, US, and Oxford, UK.
47. Swenson, N.G. & Enquist, B.J. 2007. Ecological and evolutionary determinants of a key plant functional trait: wood density and its community-wide variation across latitude and elevation. American Journal of Botany 94: 451-459.
48. Swenson, N.G., Enquist, B.J., Thompson, J. & Zimmerman, J.K. 2007. The influence of spatial and size scale on phylogenetic relatedness in tropical forest communities. Ecology 88: 1770-1780, doi: DOI: 10.1890/06-1499.1.
49. Toronto International Data Release Workshop. 2009. Prepublication data sharing. Nature 461: 168-170.
50. U.S. Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC), Vegetation Subcommittee. 2008. National Vegetation Classification Standard (Version 2). FGDC-STD-005-2008. Available at:.
51. van der Maarel, E. 1979. Transformation of cover-abundance values in phytosociology and its effects on community similarity. Vegetatio 39: 97-114.
52. Weber, H.E., Moravec, J. & Theurillat, J.-P. 2000. International code of phytosociological nomenclature. 3rd ed. Journal of Vegetation Science 1: 739-768.
53. Weiser, M.D., Enquist, B.J., Boyle, B., Killeen, T.J., Jørgensen, P.M., Fonseca, G., Jennings, M.D., Kerkhoff, A.J., Lacher, T.E. Jr, Monteagudo, A., Núñez Vargas, M.P., Phillips, O.L., Swenson, N.G. & Vásquez Martínez, R. 2007. Latitudinal patterns of range size and species richness of New World woody plants. Global Ecology and Biogeography 16: 679-688.
54. Whitlock, M.C., McPeek, M.A., Rausher, M.D., Rieseberg, L. & Moore, A.J. 2010. Data archiving. American Naturalist 175: 145-146.
55. Whittaker, R.H. 1975. Communities and ecosystems. 2nd ed. Macmillan, New York.
56. Wiser, S.K., Bellingham, P.J. & Burrows, L. 2001. Managing biodiversity information: development of the National Vegetation Survey Databank. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 25: 1-17.
57. Zimmerman, A.S. 2008. New knowledge from old data: the role of standards in the sharing and reuse of ecological data. Science, Technology & Human Values 33: 631-652.