Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,908

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 54 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The distance decay of similarity in biogeography and ecology

Nekola, Jeffrey C., White, Peter S.·1999·Journal of Biogeography

Abstract

Summary: Aim Our aim was to understand how similarity changes with distance in biological communities, to use the distance decay perspective as quantitative technique to describe biogeographic pattern, and to explore whether growth form, dispersal type, rarity, or support affected the rate of distance decay in similarity. Location North American spruce‐fir forests, Appalachian montane spruce‐fir forests. Methods We estimated rates of distance decay through regression of log‐transformed compositional similarity against distance for pairwise comparisons of thirty‐four white spruce plots and twenty‐six black spruce plots distributed from eastern Canada to Alaska, six regional floras along the crest of the Appalachians, and six regional floras along the east–west extent of the boreal forest. Results Similarity decreased significantly with distance, with the most linear models relating the log of similarity to untransformed distance. The rate of similarity decay was 1.5–1.9 times higher for vascular plants than for bryophytes. The rate of distance decay was highest for berry‐fruited and nut‐bearing species (1.7 times higher than plumose‐seeded species and 1.9 times higher than microseeded/spore species) and 2.1 times higher for herbs than woody plants. There was no distance decay for rare species, while species of intermediate frequency had 2.0 times higher distance decay rates than common species. The rate of distance decay was 2.7 times higher for floras from the fragmented Appalachians than for floras from the contiguous boreal forest. Main conclusions The distance decay of similarity can be caused by either a decrease in environmental similarity with distance (e.g. climatic gradients) or by limits to dispersal and niche width differences among taxa. Regardless of cause, the distance decay of similarity provides a simple descriptor of how biological diversity is distributed and therefore has consequences for conservation strategy.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-2699.1999.00305.x

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 54 references

Cited by

See all 1,908

Metadata

Authors
Nekola, J. C., & White, P. S.
Venue
Journal of Biogeography
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1999-07
Volume
26
Issue
4
Pages
867-878
ISSN
  • 0305-0270 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2699
OpenAlex
W2162873750
Cited by
1,908
References
54
FWCI
8.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The distance decay of similarity in biogeography and ecology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2699.1999.00305.x
The paper
Nekola, J. C., & White, P. S. (1999). The distance decay of similarity in biogeography and ecology. Journal of Biogeography. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2699.1999.00305.x

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.