The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A conceptual framework for understanding semi‐arid land degradation: ecohydrological interactions across multiple‐space and time scales
Open accessAbstract
Land degradation is a problem prolific across semi‐arid areas worldwide. Despite being a complex process including both biotic and abiotic elements, previous attempts to understand ecosystem dynamics have largely been carried out within the disparate disciplines of ecology and hydrology, which has led to significant limitations. Here, an ecohydrological framework is outlined, to provide a new direction for the study of land degradation in semi‐arid ecosystems. Unlike other frameworks that draw upon hierarchy theory to provide a broad, non‐explicit conceptual framework, this new framework is based upon the explicit linkage of processes operating over the continuum of temporal and spatial scales by perceiving the ecosystem as a series of structural and functional connections, within which interactions between biotic and abiotic components of the landscape occur. It is hypothesized that semi‐arid land degradation conforms to a cusp‐catastrophe model in which the two controlling variables are abiotic structural connectivity and abiotic functional connectivity, which implicitly account for ecosystem resilience, and biotic structural and function connectivity. It is suggested therefore that future research must (1) evaluate how abiotic and biotic function (i.e. water, sediment and nutrient loss/redistribution) vary over grass–shrub transitions and (2) quantify the biotic/abiotic structure over grass‐shrub transitions, to (3) determine the interactions between ecosystem structure and function, and interactions/feedbacks between biotic and abiotic components of the ecosystem. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Resilience, Adaptability and Transformability in Social–ecological Systems
Walker, B., Holling, C. S., Carpenter, S. R., & Kinzig, A. P. (2004) · Ecology and Society · doi:10.5751/es-00650-090205 · Cited by 7,821
Cited by
Sediment connectivity: a framework for understanding sediment transfer at multiple scales
Bracken, L. J., Turnbull, L., Wainwright, J., & Bogaart, P. (2015) · Earth Surface Processes and Landforms · doi:10.1002/esp.3635 · Cited by 559
Self-citationA synthetic review of feedbacks and drivers of shrub encroachment in arid grasslands
D'Odorico, P., Okin, G. S., & Bestelmeyer, B. T. (2012) · Ecohydrology · doi:10.1002/eco.259 · Cited by 440
Indices of sediment connectivity: opportunities, challenges and limitations
Heckmann, T., Cavalli, M., Cerdan, O., Foerster, S., Javaux, M., Lode, E., Smetanová, A., Vericat, D., & Brardinoni, F. (2018) · Earth-Science Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.earscirev.2018.08.004 · Cited by 425
Connectivity as an emergent property of geomorphic systems
Wohl, E., Brierley, G., Cadol, D., Coulthard, T. J., Covino, T., Fryirs, K. A., Grant, G., Hilton, R. G., Lane, S. N., Magilligan, F. J., et al. (2019) · Earth Surface Processes and Landforms · doi:10.1002/esp.4434 · Cited by 411
Cunliffe, A. M., Brazier, R. E., & Anderson, K. (2016) · Remote Sensing of Environment · doi:10.1016/j.rse.2016.05.019 · Cited by 365
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Turnbull, L., Wainwright, J., & Brazier, R. E.
- Venue
- Ecohydrology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-01
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 23-34
- ISSN
- 1936-0584 (ISSN-L)
- 1936-0592
- OpenAlex
- W2109917507
- Cited by
- 311
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 11.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.