Does the universality of the species-area relationship apply to smaller scales and across taxonomic groups?

Ecography

Volumn 36, Issue 9, 2013, Pages 965-970

  Lazarina, Maria ^a   Kallimanis, Athanasios S ^b   Sgardelis, Stefanos P ^a  

^a ARISTOTLE UNIVERSITY OF THESSALONIKI   (Greece)

^b University of Western Greece   (Greece)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOGEOGRAPHICAL REGION; COLLAPSE; DATA ACQUISITION; GENETIC DIFFERENTIATION; RANGE SIZE; SPECIES RICHNESS; SPECIES-AREA RELATIONSHIP; TAXONOMY;

AVES; PAPILIONOIDEA;

EID: 84883263521     PISSN: 09067590     EISSN: 16000587     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0587.2013.00149.x     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Allen A. P. and White E. P. 2003. Effect of range size on species-area relationships. Evol. Ecol. Res. 5: 493-499.
2. Andrle R. F. and Carroll J. R. 1988. The atlas of breeding birds in New York State - Cornell Univ. Press.
3. Arita H. T and Rodríguez P. 2002. Geographic range, turnover rate and the scaling of species diversity. Ecography 25: 541-550.
4. Azovsky A. I. 2002. Size-dependent species-area relationships in benthos: is the world more diverse for microbes? Ecography 25: 273-282.
5. Azovsky A. I. 2011. Species-area and species-sampling effort relationships: disentangling the effects. Ecography 34: 18-30.
6. Butterfly distributions for Great Britain for the period 2005-2009 - From the Butterfly Conservation and the Biological Records Centre, accessed December 2012.
7. Crawley M. J. and Harral J. E. 2001. Scale dependence in plant biodiversity. Science 291: 864-868.
8. Dengler J. 2009. Which function describes the species-area relationship best? A review and empirical evaluation. J. Biogeogr. 36: 728-744.
9. Drakare S. et al. 2006. The imprint of the geographical, evolutionary and ecological context on species-area relationships. Ecol. Lett. 9: 215-227.
10. Fridley J. D. et al. 2005. Connecting fine- and broad scale species-area relationship of southeastern U.S. flora. Ecology 86: 1172-1177.
11. Gibbons D. W. et al. 1993. The new atlas of breeding birds in Britain and Ireland: 1988-1991. -T. and A. D. Poyser.
12. Grilli J. et al. 2012. Spatial aggregation and the species-area relationship across scales. J. Theor. Biol. 313: 87-97.
13. Harte J. and Kinzig A. P. 1997. On the implications of species- area relationships for endemism, spatial turnover, and food web patterns. Oikos 80: 417-427.
14. Harte J. et al. 2009. Biodiversity scales from plots to biomes with a universal species-area curve. -Ecol. Lett. 12: 789-797.
15. He F. and Legendre P. 2002. Species diversity patterns derived from species-area models. Ecology 83: 1185-1198.
16. Hubbell S. P. 2001. The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography - Princeton Univ. Press.
17. Kallimanis A. S. et al. 2006. Scale dependence of the local- regional diversity relationship: empirical evidence from a woody plant community. J. Biol. Res. 6: 221-226.
18. Kallimanis A. S. et al. 2008. The scale of analysis determines the spatial pattern of woody species diversity in the Mediterranean environment. Plant Ecol. 196: 143-151.
19. Lazarina M. et al. 2013. An effort-based index of beta diversity. Methods Ecol. Evol. 4: 217-225.
20. Lennon J. J. et al. 2001. The geographical structure of British bird distributions: diversity, spatial turnover and scale. J. Anim. Ecol. 70: 966-979.
21. Mac Nally R. et al. 2004. Comparative influence of spatial scale on beta diversity within regional assemblages of birds and butterflies. J. Biogeogr. 31: 917-929.
22. McGowan K. and Corwin K. 2008. The second atlas of breeding birds in New York State - Cornell Univ. Press.
23. Petersen W. R. and Meservey W. R. 2004. Massachusetts breeding bird atlas - Univ. of Massachusetts Press.
24. Preston C. D. et al. 2002. New atlas of the British flora - Oxford Univ. Press.
25. Rosenzweig M. L. 1995. Species diversity in space and time - Cambridge Univ. Press.
26. Rosindell J. L and Cornell S. J. 2007. Species-area relationships from a spatially explicit neutral model in an infinite landscape. Ecol. Lett. 10: 586-595.
27. Rosindell J. and Cornell S. J. 2012. Universal scaling of species-abundance distributions across multiple scales. Oikos doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2012.20751.x
28. Routledge R. D. 1984. Estimating ecological components of biodiversity. Oikos 42: 23-29.
29. San Diego County Plant Atlas Project 2011 - accessed December 2012.
30. Scheiner S. M. 2003. Six types of species-area curves. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 12: 441-447.
31. Scheiner S. M. et al. 2011. The underpinnings of the relationship of species richness with space and time. Ecol. Monogr. 81: 195-213.
32. Schoener T. W. 1976. The species-area relationship within archipelagoes: models and evidence from island birds - In: Firth H. J. and Calaby J. H. (eds), Proc. of the XVI Int. Ornithol. Congr. Australian Acad. of Sci., pp. 629-642.
33. Sharrock J. T. R. 1976. The atlas of breeding birds in Britain and Ireland. T. and A. D. Poyser.
34. Šizling A. L. et al. 2011. Between geometry and biology: the problem of universality of the species-area relationship. Am. Nat. 178: 602-611.
35. Šizling A. L. et al. 2013. Taxon-and-area invariances, maximum entropy, and the species-area relationship: a reply to Harte et al. Am. Nat. 181: 288-290.
36. Storch D. et al. 2012. Universal species-area and endemics-area relationships at continental scales. Nature 488: 78-81.
37. Tjørve E. and Tjørve K. M. C. 2008. The species-area relationship, self-similarity, and the true meaning of the z-value. Ecology 89: 3528-3533.
38. Tjørve E. et al. 2008. Species-area relationship: separating the effects of species abundance and spatial distribution. J. Ecol. 96: 1141-1151.
39. Triantis K. A. et al. 2012. The island species-area relationship: biology and statistics. J. Biogeogr. 39: 215-231.
40. Turner W. R. and Tjørve E. 2005. Scale-dependence in species area-relationships. Ecography 28: 721-730.
41. Unitt P. 2004. San Diego County bird atlas - Sunbelt Publications.