Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 426

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Range dynamics of mountain plants decrease with elevation

Open access
Rumpf, Sabine B., Hülber, Karl, Klonner, Günther, Moser, Dietmar, Schütz, Martin, Wessely, Johannes, Willner, Wolfgang, Zimmermann, Niklaus E., Dullinger, Stefan·2018·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Many studies report that mountain plant species are shifting upward in elevation. However, the majority of these reports focus on shifts of upper limits. Here, we expand the focus and simultaneously analyze changes of both range limits, optima, and abundances of 183 mountain plant species. We therefore resurveyed 1,576 vegetation plots first recorded before 1970 in the European Alps. We found that both range limits and optima shifted upward in elevation, but the most pronounced trend was a mean increase in species abundance. Despite huge species-specific variation, range dynamics showed a consistent trend along the elevational gradient: Both range limits and optima shifted upslope faster the lower they were situated historically, and species’ abundance increased more for species from lower elevations. Traits affecting the species’ dispersal and persistence capacity were not related to their range dynamics. Using indicator values to stratify species by their thermal and nutrient demands revealed that elevational ranges of thermophilic species tended to expand, while those of cold-adapted species tended to contract. Abundance increases were strongest for nutriphilous species. These results suggest that recent climate warming interacted with airborne nitrogen deposition in driving the observed dynamics. So far, the majority of species appear as “winners” of recent changes, yet “losers” are overrepresented among high-elevation, cold-adapted species with low nutrient demands. In the decades to come, high-alpine species may hence face the double pressure of climatic changes and novel, superior competitors that move up faster than they themselves can escape to even higher elevations.

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 · 10.1073/pnas.1713936115

Cites

40 of 40 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 40 references

Metadata

Authors
Rumpf, S. B., Hülber, K., Klonner, G., Moser, D., Schütz, M., Wessely, J., Willner, W., Zimmermann, N. E., & Dullinger, S.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2018-01-29
Volume
115
Issue
8
Pages
1848-1853
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2788826775
Cited by
426
References
40
FWCI
35.56
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

How to cite

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

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Range dynamics of mountain plants decrease with elevation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.1713936115
The paper
Rumpf, S. B., Hülber, K., Klonner, G., Moser, D., Schütz, M., Wessely, J., Willner, W., Zimmermann, N. E., & Dullinger, S. (2018). Range dynamics of mountain plants decrease with elevation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1713936115

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.