Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 309

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Amphibian species richness across environmental gradients

Open access
Werner, Earl E., Skelly, David K., Relyea, Rick A., Yurewicz, Kerry L.·2007·Oikos

Abstract

Large‐scale field patterns are a fundamental source of inferences on processes responsible for variation in species richness among habitats. We examined species richness of larval amphibian communities in 37 ponds over seven years on the Univ. of Michigan's E. S. George Reserve. Ordination of the community incidence matrix indicated a strong major axis of variation in species associations that was correlated with pond hydroperiod, surface area and forest canopy cover. Communities were significantly nested with those species found in ponds with high canopy cover, small area and short hydroperiod being nested subsets of those found in ponds with contrasting characteristics. Presence of fish had strong negative effects on species richness; relaxation of this effect also was apparent when fish were extirpated from ponds by drought. We employed a model selection analysis to identify the most appropriate statistical model for predicting the long‐term average species richness of these ponds from local abiotic and biotic (predator and competitor density) factors. A model including only the abiotic factors was overwhelmingly superior for the anurans; hierarchical partitioning indicated that area and canopy cover alone accounted for over 70% of the independent effects of predictor variables. The global model including both abiotic and biotic factors was the best supported model for the caudates, and correspondingly hierarchical partitioning suggested that area, hydroperiod, invertebrate predators and caudate biomass all accounted for 9–16% of the independent effects. Overall, biotic factors accounted for much less of the variation in species richness than abiotic factors. The patterns in larger, open‐canopy ponds provided little evidence of competitive effects on species richness, though there were patterns consistent with competitive effects in small, closed‐canopy ponds. The unusual temporal and spatial extent of these data enabled us to critically evaluate ideas regarding patterns in larval amphibian communities, and the effects of area, disturbance (hydroperiod) and productivity (canopy cover) on species richness of these communities. These results have important implications to the conservation of amphibian species richness in freshwater wetlands, which are among the most threatened ecosystems worldwide.

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/j.0030-1299.2007.15935.x

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Werner, E. E., Skelly, D. K., Relyea, R. A., & Yurewicz, K. L.
Venue
Oikos
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-10
Volume
116
Issue
10
Pages
1697-1712
ISSN
  • 0030-1299 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0706
OpenAlex
W2109556035
Cited by
309
References
3
FWCI
14.60
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

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.