The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Are ecologists conducting research at the optimal scale?
Open accessAbstract
Aim: The spatial extent (scale) at which landscape attributes are measured has a strong impact on inferred species–landscape relationships. Consequently, researchers commonly measure landscape variables at multiple scales to select one scale (the ‘scale of effect’) that yields the strongest species–landscape relationship. Scales of effect observed in multiscale studies may not be true scales of effect if scales are arbitrarily selected and/or are too narrow in range. Miscalculation of the scale of effect may explain why the theoretical relationship between scale of effect and species traits, e.g. dispersal distance, is not empirically well supported. Location: World‐wide. Methods: Using data from 583 species in 71 studies we conducted a quantitative review of multiscale studies to evaluate whether research has been conducted at the true scale of effect. Results: Multiple lines of evidence indicated that multiscale studies are often conducted at suboptimal scales. We did not find convincing evidence of a relationship between observed scale of effect and any of 29 species traits. Instead, observed scales of effect were strongly positively predicted by the smallest and largest scales evaluated by researchers. Only 29% of studies reported biological reasons for the scales evaluated. Scales tended to be narrow in range (the mean range is 0.9 orders of magnitude) and few (the mean number of scales evaluated is four). Many species (44%) had observed scales of effect equal to the smallest or largest scale evaluated, suggesting a better scale was outside that range. Increasing the range of scales evaluated decreased the proportion of species with scales of effect equal to the smallest or largest scale evaluated. Main conclusions: To ensure that species–landscape relationships are well estimated, we recommend that the scales at which landscape variables are measured range widely, from the size of a single territory to well above the average dispersal distance.
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
David, F. N., & Tukey, J. W. (1977) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529486 · Cited by 12,708
The Problem of Pattern and Scale in Ecology: The Robert H. MacArthur Award Lecture
Levin, S. A. (1992) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1941447 · Cited by 6,792
Linear Mixed-Effects Models using 'Eigen' and S4
Bates, D. M., Maechler, M., Bolker, B. M., & Walker, S. C. (2015) · Cited by 5,924
The Ecological Implications of Body Size
Peters, R. H. (1983) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511608551 · Cited by 5,649
Burnham, K. P., Anderson, D. R., & Huyvaert, K. P. (2011) · Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology · doi:10.1007/s00265-010-1029-6 · Cited by 4,104 · cited 2×
“…structure and an ecological response is evaluated by considering the size of the correlation coefficient, the regression slope or the information value (sensu Burnham et al., 2011) of models in which a measure of landscape structure is the predictor and an ecological measure is the response (Fig.”
BackgroundMethodWiens, J. A. (1989) · Functional Ecology · doi:10.2307/2389612 · Cited by 3,689
The Ecological Implications of Body Size.
Bonner, N., & Peters, R. H. (1985) · The Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.2307/2403351 · Cited by 683
Evolution of Body Size: Consequences of an Energetic Definition of Fitness
Brown, J. H., Marquet, P. A., & Taper, M. L. (1993) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/285558 · Cited by 658
Determining the Spatial Scale of Species' Response to Habitat
Holland, J. D., Bert, D. G., & Fahrig, L. (2004) · BioScience · doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2004)054[0227:dtssos]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 456
Self-citationDISPERSAL DISTANCE OF MAMMALS IS PROPORTIONAL TO HOME RANGE SIZE
Bowman, J., Jaeger, J. A. G., & Fahrig, L. (2002) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[2049:ddomip]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 444
Self-citation
Cited by
V. H. Safar, N., van der Sande, M., G. R. Schaefer, C. E., S. Magnago, L. F., Martins, S. V., Simonelli, M., & Poorter, L. (2022) · Forest Ecology and Management · doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2022.120395 · Cited by 15
Metadata
- Authors
- Jackson, H. B., & Fahrig, L.
- Venue
- Global Ecology and Biogeography
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-09-26
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 52-63
- ISSN
- 1466-822X (ISSN-L)
- 1466-8238
- OpenAlex
- W1497165213
- Cited by
- 640
- References
- 29
- FWCI
- 18.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Are ecologists conducting research at the optimal scale? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/geb.12233
- The paper
- Jackson, H. B., & Fahrig, L. (2015). Are ecologists conducting research at the optimal scale? Global Ecology and Biogeography. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.12233
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.