Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 51

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 52 of the 52 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Applying species distribution modelling to improving conservation based decisions: a gap analysis of Trinidad and Tobago’s endemic vascular plants

Spiers, Joshua A., Oatham, Michael P., Rostant, Luke V., Farrell, Aidan D.·2018·Biodiversity and Conservation
DOI 10.1007/s10531-018-1578-y
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

For the successful conservation of a species, habitat loss and fragmentation must be controlled through a protected area network that adequately covers its habitat. Here the suitable habitats of all of Trinidad and Tobago’s endemic plant species are determined and used to perform a gap analysis of a proposed protected area network. Data from a recently completed botanical survey, the WorldClim 2 environmental parameters, and a range of other sources were used to determine the habitat of each species using the species distribution model MaxEnt. Modelled habitat suitability for each species was combined and used to create maps showing endemic richness, weighted endemism and corrected weighted endemism, and to rank areas by conservation value using Zonation. The coverage of the proposed protected area network and a land use map were overlaid on these modelled distributions. We identified data limitations which meant that more than half of the 66 endemic species could not be modelled with confidence. For the remaining species, we found that the proposed protected area network contains just 13 ± 7% of the total modelled habitat of the endemic species. For eight endemic species > 25% of the suitable habitat is degraded. Model analysis indicated that elevation and temperature seasonality are the most important drivers of endemism. Based on a gap analysis the inclusion of high elevation areas of Trinidad’s Northern Range in the proposed protected area network would expand the coverag…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10531-018-1578-y

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Brown C, Hansell J, Bally G, Hardy F (1965) Land capability survey of Trinidad and Tobago, 1st edn. Trinidad Government Printery, Port of Spain
  2. Hoover JD, Kumar S, James SA, Leisz SJ, Laituri M (2017) Modeling hotspots of plant diversity in New Guinea. Trop Ecol 58(3):623–640
  3. Hutchinson GE (1957) Cold spring harbor symposium on quantitative biology. Concluding Remarks 22:415–427
  4. Starr CK (2009) Trinidad & Tobago. The Encyclopedia of Islands. University California Press, Berkeley, pp 926–929

Cited by

See all 51

Metadata

Authors
Spiers, J. A., Oatham, M. P., Rostant, L. V., & Farrell, A. D.
Venue
Biodiversity and Conservation
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2018-06-21
Volume
27
Issue
11
Pages
2931-2949
ISSN
  • 0960-3115
  • 1572-9710
DOI
10.1007/s10531-018-1578-y
Cited by
51
References
52
Language
en
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Funders
  • Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (GCP/TRI/003/GFF)
  • Global Environment Facility (GCP/TRI/003/GFF)

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.