Universal scaling of species-abundance distributions across multiple scales

Oikos

Volumn 122, Issue 7, 2013, Pages 1101-1111

  Rosindell, James ^a,b   Cornell, Stephen J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^b IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ABUNDANCE; BIOGEOGRAPHICAL REGION; DISPERSAL; METAPOPULATION; NUMERICAL MODEL; POPULATION DISTRIBUTION; SPECIES-AREA RELATIONSHIP;

EID: 84879420394     PISSN: 00301299     EISSN: 16000706     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2012.20751.x     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Alonso D. and McKane A. J. 2004. Sampling Hubbell's neutral theory of biodiversity. Ecol. Lett. 7: 901-910.
2. Alonso D. et al. 2006. The merits of neutral theory. Trends Ecol. Evol. 21: 451-457.
3. Bell G. 2000. The distribution of abundance in neutral communities. Am. Nat. 155: 606-617.
4. Borda-de Água L. et al. 2011. Spatial scaling of species abundance distributions. Ecography 34: 1-8.
5. Chisholm R. A. and Lichstein J. W. 2009. Linking dispersal, immigration and scale in the neutral theory of biodiversity. Ecol. Lett. 12: 1385-1393.
6. Clark J. S. et al. 1999. Seed dispersal near and far: patterns across temperate and tropical forests. Ecology 80: 1475-1494.
7. Condit R. 1998. Tropical forest census plots. - Springer and R. G. Landes company, Berlin, Germany.
8. Durrett R. and Levin S. 1996. Spatial models for species-area curves. J. Theor. Biol. 179: 119-127.
9. Economo E. P. and Keitt T. H. 2008. Species diversity in neutral metacommunities: a network approach. Ecol. Lett. 11: 52-62.
10. Etienne R. S. 2005. A new sampling formula for neutral biodiversity. Ecol. Lett. 8: 253-260.
11. Etienne R. S. 2007. A neutral sampling formula for multiple samples and an 'exact' test of neutrality. Ecol. Lett. 10: 608-618.
12. Etienne R. S. and Rosindell J. 2011. The spatial limitations of current neutral models of biodiversity. PLoS One 6: e14717.
13. Etienne R. and Rosindell J. 2012. Prolonging the past counteracts the pull of the present: protracted speciation can explain observed slowdowns in diversification. Syst. Biol. 61: 204-213.
14. Etienne R. S. et al. 2006. Comment on 'neutral ecological theory reveals isolation and rapid speciation in a biodiversity hot spot'. Science 311: 610.
15. Etienne R. S. et al. 2007. The zero-sum assumption in neutral biodiversity theory. J. Theor. Biol. 248: 522-536.
16. Fisher R. A. et al. 1943. The relation between the number of species and the number of individuals in a random sample of an animal population. J. Anim. Ecol. 12: 42-58.
17. Harte J. et al. 2008. Maximum entropy and the state-variable approach to macroecology. Ecology 89: 2700-2711.
18. Horvat S. et al. 2010. A spatially explicit model for tropical tree diversity patterns. J. Theor. Biol. 265: 517-523.
19. Houchmandzadeh B. and Vallade M. 2003. Clustering in neutral ecology. Phys. Rev. E 68: 061912.
20. Hubbell S. P. 2001. The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography. - Princeton Univ. Press.
21. Hubbell S. P. et al. 1999. Light-gap disturbances, recruitment limitation, and tree diversity in a neotropical forest. Science 283: 554-557.
22. Hubbell S. P. et al. 2005. Barro colorado forest census plot data. < http://ctfs.si.edu/datasets/bci >
23. Kůrka P. et al. 2010. Analytical evidence for scale-invariance in the shape of species abundance distributions. Math. Biosci. 223: 151-159.
24. Leigh E. G. 2007. Neutral theory: a historical perspective. J. Evol. Biol. 20: 2075-2091.
25. Leigh E. G. et al. 2010. Unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography. Scholarpedia 5(11): 8822.
26. Muneepeerakul R. et al. 2008. Neutral metacommunity models predict fish diversity patterns in Mississippi-Missouri basin. Nature 453: 220-222.
27. Nathan R. 2006. Long-distance dispersal of plants. Science 313: 786-788.
28. Pigolotti S. and Cencini M. 2009. Speciation-rate dependence in species-area relationships. J. Theor. Biol. 260: 83-89.
29. Pigolotti S. et al. 2004. Stochastic model for the species abundance problem in an ecological community. Phys. Rev. E 70: 011916.
30. Ricklefs R. E. 2003. A comment on hubbell's zero-sum ecological drift model. Oikos 100: 185-192.
31. Rosindell J. and Cornell S. J. 2007. Species-area relationships from a spatially explicit neutral model in an infinite landscape. Ecol. Lett. 10: 586-595.
32. Rosindell J. and Cornell S. J. 2009. Species-area curves, neutral models and long distance dispersal. Ecology 90: 1743-1750.
33. Rosindell J. et al. 2008. A coalescence approach to spatial neutral ecology. Ecol. Inf. 3: 259-271.
34. Rosindell J. et al. 2010. Protracted speciation revitalizes the neutral theory of biodiversity. Ecol. Lett. 13: 716-727.
35. Rosindell J. et al. 2011. The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography at age ten. Trends Ecol. Evol. 26: 340-348.
36. Rosindell J. et al. 2012. The case for ecological neutral theory. Trends Ecol. Evol. 27: 203-208.
37. izling A. L. et al. 2009. Species abundance distribution results from a spatial analogy of central limit theorem. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106: 6691-6695.
38. Storch D. et al. 2012. Universal species-area and endemics- area relationships at continental scales. Nature 488: 78-81.
39. Vallade M. and Houchmandzadeh B. 2003. Analytical solution of a neutral model of biodiversity. Phys. Rev. E 68: 061902.
40. Vanpeteghem D. and Haegeman B. 2010. An analytical approach to spatio-temporal dynamics of neutral community models. J. Math. Biol. 61: 323-357.
41. Wennekes P. et al. 2012. The neutral-niche debate: a philosophical perspective. Acta Biotheor. 60: 257-271.
42. Zillio T. and He F. 2009. Inferring species abundance distribution across spatial scales. Oikos 119: 71-80.
43. Zillio T. et al. 2005. Spatial scaling in model plant communities. Phys. Rev. Lett. 95: 098101.
44. Zillio T. et al. 2008. Incipient criticality in ecological communities. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105: 18714-18717.