Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 408

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 63 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Species–area relationships and extinctions caused by habitat loss and fragmentation

Rybicki, Joel, Hanski, Ilkka·2013·Ecology Letters
DOI 10.1111/ele.12065
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The species–area relationship ( SAR ) has been used to predict the numbers of species going extinct due to habitat loss, but other researchers have maintained that SAR s overestimate extinctions and instead one should use the endemics–area relationship ( EAR ) to predict extinctions. Here, we employ spatially explicit simulations of large numbers of species in spatially heterogeneous landscapes to investigate SARs and extinctions in a dynamic context. The EAR gives the number of species going extinct immediately after habitat loss, but typically many other species have unviable populations in the remaining habitat and go extinct soon afterwards. We conclude that the EAR underestimates extinctions due to habitat loss, the continental SAR (with slope ~0.1 or somewhat less) gives a good approximation of short‐term extinctions, while the island SAR calculated for discrete fragments of habitat (with slope ~0.25) predicts the long‐term extinctions. However, when the remaining area of land‐covering habitat such as forest is roughly less than 20% of the total landscape and the habitat is highly fragmented, all current SARs underestimate extinction rate. We show how the ‘fragmentation effect’ can be incorporated into a predictive SAR model. When the remaining habitat is highly fragmented, an effective way to combat the fragmentation effect is to aggregate habitat fragments into clusters rather than to place them randomly across the landscape.

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 · 10.1111/ele.12065

Cites

63 of 63 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 63 references

Research works printed but not linked: 13

  1. Blackburn T.M., 2003, Macroecology: Concepts and Consequences
  2. 10.1016/j.biocon.2004.07.019 · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2004.07.019
  3. 10.1016/S0006-3207(99)00064-6 · doi:10.1016/s0006-3207(99)00064-6
  4. 10.1007/s10841-007-9085-6 · doi:10.1007/s10841-007-9085-6
  5. 10.2307/3546614 · doi:10.2307/3546614
  6. Hottola J., 2006, Uusi Metsäkirja, 206
  7. 10.1080/02827580500530009 · doi:10.1080/02827580500530009
  8. May R.M., 1995, Extinction Rates, 1
  9. 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.98163.x · doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.98163.x
  10. 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00210.x · doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00210.x
  11. 10.1016/j.foreco.2005.10.059 · doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2005.10.059
  12. 10.1080/028275802753626818 · doi:10.1080/028275802753626818
  13. Yrjönen K, 2004, Metsälain Erityisen Tärkeät Elinympäristöt

Cited by

See all 408

Metadata

Authors
Rybicki, J., & Hanski, I.
Venue
Ecology Letters
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-03-03
Volume
16
Issue
s1
Pages
27-38
ISSN
  • 1461-023X (ISSN-L)
  • 1461-0248
DOI
10.1111/ele.12065
OpenAlex
W2124923857
Cited by
408
References
63
FWCI
29.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)

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: Species–area relationships and extinctions caused by habitat loss and fragmentation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/ele.12065
The paper
Rybicki, J., & Hanski, I. (2013). Species–area relationships and extinctions caused by habitat loss and fragmentation. Ecology Letters. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12065

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.