The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Predicting spatial patterns of plant species richness: a comparison of direct macroecological and species stacking modelling approaches: Predicting plant species richness
Open accessAbstract
Aim This study compares the direct, macroecological approach (MEM) for modelling species richness (SR) with the more recent approach of stacking predictions from individual species distributions (S-SDM). We implemented both approaches on the same dataset and discuss their respective theoretical assumptions, strengths and drawbacks. We also tested how both approaches performed in reproducing observed patterns of SR along an elevational gradient. Location Two study areas in the Alps of Switzerland. Methods We implemented MEM by relating the species counts to environmental predictors with statistical models, assuming a Poisson distribution. S-SDM was implemented by modelling each species distribution individually and then stacking the obtained prediction maps in three different ways – summing binary predictions, summing random draws of binomial trials and summing predicted probabilities – to obtain a final species count. Results The direct MEM approach yields nearly unbiased predictions centred around the observed mean values, but with a lower correlation between predictions and observations, than that achieved by the S-SDM approaches. This method also cannot provide any information on species identity and, thus, community composition. It does, however, accurately reproduce the hump-shaped pattern of SR observed along the elevational gradient. The S-SDM approach summing binary maps can predict individual species and thus communities, but tends to overpredict SR. The two other S-SDM approaches – the summed binomial trials based on predicted probabilities and summed predicted probabilities – do not overpredict richness, but they predict many competing end points of assembly or they lose the individual species predictions, respectively. Furthermore, all S-SDM approaches fail to appropriately reproduce the observed hump-shaped patterns of SR along the elevational gradient. Main conclusions Macroecological approach and S-SDM have complementary strengths. We suggest that both could be used in combination to obtain better SR predictions by following the suggestion of constraining S-SDM by MEM predictions.
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
Greedy function approximation: A gradient boosting machine
Friedman, J. H. (2001) · The Annals of Statistics · doi:10.1214/aos/1013203451 · Cited by 30,731
McCullagh, P., & Nelder, J. A. (1989) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-3242-6 · Cited by 16,836
Global Biodiversity Scenarios for the Year 2100
Sala, O. E., Stuart Chapin, F., III, Armesto, J. J., Berlow, E., Bloomfield, J., Dirzo, R., Huber-Sanwald, E., Huenneke, L. F., Jackson, R. B., et al. (2000) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.287.5459.1770 · Cited by 9,280
A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models
FIELDING, A. H., & BELL, J. F. (1997) · Environmental Conservation · doi:10.1017/s0376892997000088 · Cited by 6,956
Friedman, J., Hastie, T., & Tibshirani, R. (2000) · The Annals of Statistics · doi:10.1214/aos/1016218223 · Cited by 6,884
Hutchinson, G. E. (1957) · Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology · doi:10.1101/sqb.1957.022.01.039 · Cited by 6,228
A General Hypothesis of Species Diversity
Huston, M. (1979) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/283366 · Cited by 3,390
Selecting thresholds of occurrence in the prediction of species distributions
Liu, C., Berry, P. M., Dawson, T. P., & Pearson, R. G. (2005) · Ecography · doi:10.1111/j.0906-7590.2005.03957.x · Cited by 2,701
Species richness in a successional grassland: effects of nitrogen enrichment and plant litter
Foster, B. L., & Gross, K. L. (1998) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(1998)079[2593:sriasg]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 501 · cited 1×
“…of the gradient, with intensive land use and fertilization at low elevations limiting habitat types and strengthening plant competition, leading to species exclusion (Eriksson et al., 1995; Foster & Gross, 1998) and to severe environments at high elevations limiting the number of adapted species.”
Background
Cited by
Norberg, A., Abrego, N., Blanchet, F. G., Adler, F. R., Anderson, B. J., Anttila, J., Araújo, M. B., Dallas, T., Dunson, D., Elith, J., et al. (2019) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.1002/ecm.1370 · Cited by 573
Self-citationGuisan, A., & Rahbek, C. (2011) · Journal of Biogeography · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2699.2011.02550.x · Cited by 469
Self-citationStacking species distribution models and adjusting bias by linking them to macroecological models
Calabrese, J. M., Certain, G., Kraan, C., & Dormann, C. F. (2014) · Global Ecology and Biogeography · doi:10.1111/geb.12102 · Cited by 362
Testing species assemblage predictions from stacked and joint species distribution models
Zurell, D., Zimmermann, N. E., Gross, H., Baltensweiler, A., Sattler, T., & Wüest, R. O. (2020) · Journal of Biogeography · doi:10.1111/jbi.13608 · Cited by 153
Metadata
- Authors
- Dubuis, A., Pottier, J., Rion, V., Pellissier, L., Theurillat, J.-P., & Guisan, A.
- Venue
- Diversity and Distributions
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-07-28
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1122-1131
- ISSN
- 0967-9952 (ISSN-L)
- 1366-9516
- OpenAlex
- W2000745569
- Cited by
- 239
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 9.87
- 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: Predicting spatial patterns of plant species richness: a comparison of direct macroecological and species stacking modelling approaches: Predicting plant species richness. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2011.00792.x
- The paper
- Dubuis, A., Pottier, J., Rion, V., Pellissier, L., Theurillat, J.-P., & Guisan, A. (2011). Predicting spatial patterns of plant species richness: a comparison of direct macroecological and species stacking modelling approaches: Predicting plant species richness. Diversity and Distributions. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2011.00792.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.