Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 443

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 38 of the 38 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Estimating and controlling for spatial structure in the study of ecological communities

Peres‐Neto, Pedro R., Legendre, Pierre·2010·Global Ecology and Biogeography

Abstract

Aim Variation partitioning based on canonical analysis is the most commonly used analysis to investigate community patterns according to environmental and spatial predictors. Ecologists use this method in order to understand the pure contribution of the environment independent of space, and vice versa, as well as to control for inflated type I error in assessing the environmental component under spatial autocorrelation. Our goal is to use numerical simulations to compare how different spatial predictors and model selection procedures perform in assessing the importance of the spatial component and in controlling for type I error while testing environmental predictors. Innovation We determine for the first time how the ability of commonly used (polynomial regressors) and novel methods based on eigenvector maps compare in the realm of spatial variation partitioning. We introduce a novel forward selection procedure to select spatial regressors for community analysis. Finally, we point out a number of issues that have not been previously considered about the joint explained variation between environment and space, which should be taken into account when reporting and testing the unique contributions of environment and space in patterning ecological communities. Main conclusions In tests of species‐environment relationships, spatial autocorrelation is known to inflate the level of type I error and make the tests of significance invalid. First, one must determine if the spatial component is significant using all spatial predictors (Moran's eigenvector maps). If it is, consider a model selection for the set of spatial predictors (an individual‐species forward selection procedure is to be preferred) and use the environmental and selected spatial predictors in a partial regression or partial canonical analysis scheme. This is an effective way of controlling for type I error in such tests. Polynomial regressors do not provide tests with a correct level of type I error.

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.1466-8238.2009.00506.x

Cites

38 of 38 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 38 references

Cited by

See all 443

Metadata

Authors
Peres‐Neto, P. R., & Legendre, P.
Venue
Global Ecology and Biogeography
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-02-05
Volume
19
Issue
2
Pages
174-184
ISSN
  • 1466-822X (ISSN-L)
  • 1466-8238
OpenAlex
W2098601886
Cited by
443
References
38
FWCI
16.88
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: Estimating and controlling for spatial structure in the study of ecological communities. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2009.00506.x
The paper
Peres‐Neto, P. R., & Legendre, P. (2010). Estimating and controlling for spatial structure in the study of ecological communities. Global Ecology and Biogeography. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2009.00506.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.