Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 174

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

Species richness, composition and abundance of fruit‐feeding butterflies in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest: comparison between a fragmented and a continuous landscape

Uehara‐Prado, Marcio, Brown, Keith Spalding, Freitas, André Victor Lucci·2007·Global Ecology and Biogeography

Abstract

Aim To evaluate frugivorous butterflies as indicators of forest disturbance in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Location The study area is located in the municipality of Cotia, São Paulo State, south‐eastern Brazil (23°35′−23°50′ S, 46°45′−47°15′ W). Methods Sampling was done at four sites inside a large forest block, the Morro Grande State Reserve, and in five forest fragments in an adjacent fragmented landscape. Butterflies were sampled with portable traps, baited with a fermented mixture of banana and sugar cane juice. Sampling was carried out during the period most favourable for the capture of frugivorous butterflies in south‐eastern Brazil. Results All richness‐related results indicated no effect of forest fragmentation on the frugivorous butterfly guild, concurring with the suggestion of appreciable resistance of Atlantic Forest butterflies to habitat modification. However, species composition discriminated between the two landscapes, indicating that fragmentation may have effects beyond simple species richness. When species were analysed individually, clear patterns of distribution emerged, with some species that were very abundant in the fragmented landscape being practically absent in the continuous landscape, and vice versa. This pattern seems consistent even for some subfamilies. Main conclusion Our findings support the usefulness of the frugivorous butterfly guild as a biological indicator of forest disturbance effects in one of the world's most threatened ecosystems.

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.1466-8238.2006.00267.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

See all 174

Metadata

Authors
Uehara‐Prado, M., Brown, K. S., & Freitas, A. V. L.
Venue
Global Ecology and Biogeography
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-12-15
Volume
16
Issue
1
Pages
43-54
ISSN
  • 1466-822X (ISSN-L)
  • 1466-8238
OpenAlex
W2028754520
Cited by
174
References
3
FWCI
5.88
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: Species richness, composition and abundance of fruit‐feeding butterflies in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest: comparison between a fragmented and a continuous landscape. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2006.00267.x
The paper
Uehara‐Prado, M., Brown, K. S., & Freitas, A. V. L. (2007). Species richness, composition and abundance of fruit‐feeding butterflies in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest: comparison between a fragmented and a continuous landscape. Global Ecology and Biogeography. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2006.00267.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.