Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 2,663

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

ENVIRONMENTAL NICHE EQUIVALENCY VERSUS CONSERVATISM: QUANTITATIVE APPROACHES TO NICHE EVOLUTION

Warren, Dan L., Glor, Richard E., Turelli, Michael·2008·Evolution

Abstract

Environmental niche models, which are generated by combining species occurrence data with environmental GIS data layers, are increasingly used to answer fundamental questions about niche evolution, speciation, and the accumulation of ecological diversity within clades. The question of whether environmental niches are conserved over evolutionary time scales has attracted considerable attention, but often produced conflicting conclusions. This conflict, however, may result from differences in how niche similarity is measured and the specific null hypothesis being tested. We develop new methods for quantifying niche overlap that rely on a traditional ecological measure and a metric from mathematical statistics. We reexamine a classic study of niche conservatism between sister species in several groups of Mexican animals, and, for the first time, address alternative definitions of "niche conservatism" within a single framework using consistent methods. As expected, we find that environmental niches of sister species are more similar than expected under three distinct null hypotheses, but that they are rarely identical. We demonstrate how our measures can be used in phylogenetic comparative analyses by reexamining niche divergence in an adaptive radiation of Cuban anoles. Our results show that environmental niche overlap is closely tied to geographic overlap, but not to phylogenetic distances, suggesting that niche conservatism has not constrained local communities in this group to consist of closely related species. We suggest various randomization tests that may prove useful in other areas of ecology and evolutionary biology.

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.1558-5646.2008.00482.x

Cites

5 of 5 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 5 references

Cited by

See all 2,663

Metadata

Authors
Warren, D. L., Glor, R. E., & Turelli, M.
Venue
Evolution
Published
2008-11
Volume
62
Issue
11
Pages
2868-2883
ISSN
  • 0014-3820 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-5646
OpenAlex
W2110888553
Cited by
2,663
References
5
FWCI
23.63
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: ENVIRONMENTAL NICHE EQUIVALENCY VERSUS CONSERVATISM: QUANTITATIVE APPROACHES TO NICHE EVOLUTION. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1558-5646.2008.00482.x
The paper
Warren, D. L., Glor, R. E., & Turelli, M. (2008). ENVIRONMENTAL NICHE EQUIVALENCY VERSUS CONSERVATISM: QUANTITATIVE APPROACHES TO NICHE EVOLUTION. Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.2008.00482.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.