Scale dependence of vegetation-environment relationships: A meta-analysis of multivariate data

Journal of Vegetation Science

Volumn 23, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 942-951

  Siefert, Andrew ^a   Ravenscroft, Catherine ^a   Althoff, David ^a   Alvarez Yépiz, Juan C ^b   Carter, Benjamin E ^a   Glennon, Kelsey L ^a   Heberling, J Mason ^a   Jo, In Su ^a   Pontes, Alyssa ^a   Sauer, Amy ^a   Willis, Adam ^a   Fridley, Jason D ^a  

^a SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

Canonical correspondence analysis; Climate; Detrended correspondence analysis; Edaphic; Extent; Grain; Mantel; Nonmetric multidimensional scaling; Plant community; Spatial analysis

Indexed keywords

CLIMATE VARIATION; COMMUNITY COMPOSITION; DATA SET; DISTURBANCE; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; META-ANALYSIS; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PLANT COMMUNITY; SPATIAL ANALYSIS; THRESHOLD; VEGETATION STRUCTURE;

EID: 84865722979     PISSN: 11009233     EISSN: 16541103     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1654-1103.2012.01401.x     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Allen, T.F.H. & Starr, T.B. 1982. Hierarchy: perspectives for ecological complexity. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, US.
2. Bell, G., Lechowicz, M.J., Appenzeller, A., Chandler, M., Deblois, E., Jackson, L., Preziosi, R., Schallenberg, M., Tinker, N. & Mackenzie, B. 1993. The spatial structure of the physical environment. Oecologia 96: 114-121.
3. Burrough, P.A. 1981. Fractal dimensions of landscapes and other environmental data. Nature 294: 240-242.
4. Dargie, T.C.D. 1984. On the integrated interpretation of indirect site ordinations: a case study using semi-arid vegetation in southeastern Spain. Vegetatio 55: 37-55.
5. Field, R., Hawkins, B.A., Cornell, H.V., Currie, D.J., Diniz-Filho, A.F., Guegan, J.-F., Kaufmann, D.M., Kerr, J.T., Mittelbach, G.G., Oberdorff, T., O'Brien, E.M. & Turner, J.R.G. 2009. Spatial species-richness gradients across scales: a meta-analysis. Journal of Biogeography 36: 132-147.
6. Fortin, M.-J. & Dale, M. 2005. Spatial analysis: a guide for ecologists. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
7. Fortin, M.J., Drapeau, P. & Legendre, P. 1989. Spatial autocorrelation and sampling design in plant ecology. Vegetatio 83: 209-222.
8. Fridley, J.D., Peet, R.K., White, P.S. & Wentworth, T.R. 2005. Connecting fine- and broad-scale species-area relationships of Southeastern U.S. flora. Ecology 86: 1172-1177.
9. Fridley, J.D., Peet, R.K., van der Maarel, E. & Willems, J.H. 2006. Integration of local and regional species-area relationships from space-time species accumulation. The American Naturalist 168: 133-143.
10. Greig-Smith, P. 1952. The use of random and contiguous quadrats in the study of the structure of plant communities. Annals of Botany 16: 293-316.
11. Kent, M. & Ballard, J. 1988. Trends and problems in the application of classification and ordination methods in plant ecology. Plant Ecology 78: 109-124.
12. Kent, M. & Coker, P. 1992. Vegetation description and analysis: a practical approach. Belhaven Press, London, UK.
13. Kruckeberg, A.R. 2004. Geology and plant life: the effects of landforms and rock types on plants. University of Washington Press, Seattle, OR, US.
14. Lechowicz, M.J. & Bell, G. 1991. The ecology and genetics of fitness in forest plants. II. Microspatial heterogeneity of the edaphic environment. Journal of Ecology 79: 687-696.
15. Levin, S.A. 1992. The problem of pattern and scale in ecology. Ecology 73: 1943-1967.
16. McCune, B. & Grace, J.B. 2002. Analysis of ecological communities. MjM Software Design, Gleneden Beach, OR, US.
17. Økland, R.H. 1999. On the variation explained by ordination and constrained ordination axes. Journal of Vegetation Science 10: 131-136.
18. Økland, R.H. & Eilertsen, O. 1994. Canonical correspondence analysis with variation partitioning: some comments and an application. Journal of Vegetation Science 5: 117-126.
19. Palmer, M. 1990. Spatial scale and patterns of species-environment relationships in hardwood forest of North Carolina Piedmont. Coenoses 5: 79-87.
20. Palmer, M. 1993. Putting things in even better order: the advantages of canonical correspondence analysis. Ecology 74: 2215-2230.
21. Palmer, M. 2007. Species-area curves and the geometry of nature. In: Storch, M., Marquet, P. & Brown, J. (eds.) Scaling biodiversity. pp. 15-31. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
22. Palmer, M. & White, P.S. 1994. Scale dependence and the species-area relationship. The American Naturalist 144: 717-740.
23. Reed, R., Peet, R.K. & Palmer, M. 1993. Scale dependence of vegetation-environment correlations: a case study of a North Carolina piedmont woodland. Journal of Vegetation Science 4: 329-340.
24. Rossi, R.E., Mulla, D.J., Journel, A.G. & Franz, E.H. 1992. Geostatistical tools for modeling and interpreting ecological spatial dependence. Ecological Monographs 62: 277-314.
25. Schimper, A.F.W. 1903. Plant geography upon a physiological basis. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK.
26. Turner, M. 2005. Landscape ecology: what is the state of the science? Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 36: 319-344.
27. Urban, D.L., Miller, C., Halpin, P.N. & Stephenson, N.L. 2000. Forest gradient response in Sierran landscapes: the physical template. Landscape Ecology 15: 603-620.
28. Urban, D.L., Goslee, S., Pierce, K. & Lookingbill, T. 2002. Extending community ecology to landscapes. Ecoscience 9: 200-212.
29. Warming, E. 1895. Plantesamfund: grundtræk af den økologiske plantegeografi. P.G. Philipsen, Copenhagen, DK.
30. von Wehrden, H., Hanspach, J., Bruelheide, H. & Wesche, K. 2009. Pluralism and diversity: trends in the use and application of ordination methods 1990-2007. Journal of Vegetation Science 20: 695-705.
31. Wiens, J.A. 1989. Spatial scaling in ecology. Functional Ecology 3: 385-397.