Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 371

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 71 of the 71 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The partitioning of Africa: statistically defined biogeographical regions in sub‐Saharan Africa

Linder, H. Peter, de Klerk, Helen M., Born, Julia, Burgess, Neil D., Fjeldså, Jon, Rahbek, Carsten·2012·Journal of Biogeography

Abstract

Aim To test whether it is possible to establish a common biogeographical regionalization for plants and vertebrates in sub‐Saharan Africa (the Afrotropical Region), using objective multivariate methods. Location Sub‐Saharan Africa (Afrotropical Region). Methods We used 1° grid cell resolution databases for birds, mammals, amphibians and snakes (4142 vertebrate species) and c. 13% of the plants (5881 species) from the Afrotropical Region. These databases were analysed using cluster analysis techniques to define biogeographical regions. A β(sim) dissimilarity matrix was subjected to a hierarchical classification using the unweighted pair‐group method with arithmetic averages (UPGMA). The five group‐specific biogeographical regionalizations were compared against a regionalization developed from a combined database, and a regionalization that is maximally congruent with the five group‐specific datasets was determined using a consensus classification. The regionalizations were interpreted against measures of spatial turnover in richness and composition for the five datasets as well as the combined dataset. Results We demonstrate the existence of seven well‐defined and consistent biogeographical regions in sub‐Saharan Africa. These regionalizations are statistically defined and robust between groups, with minor taxon‐specific biogeographical variation. The proposed biogeographical regions are: Congolian, Zambezian, Southern African, Sudanian, Somalian, Ethiopian and Saharan. East Africa, the West African coast, and the transitions between the Congolian, Sudanian and Zambezian regions are unassigned. The Cape area in South Africa, Afromontane areas and the coastal region of East Africa do not emerge as distinct regions but are characterized by high neighbourhood heterogeneity, rapid turnover of species and high levels of narrow endemism. Main conclusions Species distribution data and modern cluster analysis techniques can be used to define biogeographical regions in Africa that reflect the patterns found in both vertebrates and plants. The consensus of the regionalizations between different taxonomic groups is high. These regions are broadly similar to those proposed using expert opinion approaches. Some previously proposed transitional zones are not recognized in this classification.

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.1365-2699.2012.02728.x

Cites

71 of 71 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 71 references

Cited by

See all 371

Metadata

Authors
Linder, H. P., de Klerk, H. M., Born, J., Burgess, N. D., Fjeldså, J., & Rahbek, C.
Venue
Journal of Biogeography
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-05-21
Volume
39
Issue
7
Pages
1189-1205
ISSN
  • 0305-0270 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2699
OpenAlex
W2115867758
Cited by
371
References
71
FWCI
22.66
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 partitioning of Africa: statistically defined biogeographical regions in sub‐Saharan Africa. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2699.2012.02728.x
The paper
Linder, H. P., de Klerk, H. M., Born, J., Burgess, N. D., Fjeldså, J., & Rahbek, C. (2012). The partitioning of Africa: statistically defined biogeographical regions in sub‐Saharan Africa. Journal of Biogeography. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2699.2012.02728.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.