The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Plant species diversity and environmental heterogeneity: spatial scale and competing hypotheses
Abstract
Questions: What is the observed relationship between plant species diversity and spatial environmental heterogeneity? Does the relationship scale predictably with sample plot size? What are the relative contributions to diversity patterns of variables linked to productivity or available energy compared to those corresponding to spatial heterogeneity? Methods: Observational and experimental studies that quantified relationships between plant species richness and within‐sample spatial environmental heterogeneity were reviewed. Effect size in experimental studies was quantified as the standardized mean difference between control (homogeneous) and heterogeneous treatments. For observational studies, effect sizes in individual studies were examined graphically across a gradient of plot size (focal scale). Relative contributions of variables representing spatial heterogeneity were compared to those representing available energy using a response ratio. Results: Forty‐one observational and 11 experimental studies quantified plant species diversity and spatial environmental heterogeneity. Observational studies reported positive species diversity‐spatial heterogeneity correlations at all points across a plot size gradient from ∼1.0 × 10−1 to ∼1.0 × 10 11 m 2, although many studies reported spatial heterogeneity variables with no significant relationships to species diversity. The cross‐study effect size in experimental studies was not significantly different from zero. Available energy variables explained consistently more of the variance in species richness than spatial heterogeneity variables, especially at the smallest and largest plot sizes. Main conclusions: Species diversity was not related to spatial heterogeneity in a way predictable by plot size. Positive heterogeneity‐diversity relationships were common, confirming the importance of niche differentiation in species diversity patterns, but future studies examining a range of spatial scales in the same system are required to determine the role of dispersal and available energy in these patterns.
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
Mechanisms of Maintenance of Species Diversity
Chesson, P. (2000) · Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.31.1.343 · Cited by 6,645
WHAT IS THE OBSERVED RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SPECIES RICHNESS AND PRODUCTIVITY?
Mittelbach, G. G., Steiner, C. F., Scheiner, S. M., Gross, K. L., Reynolds, H. L., Waide, R. B., Willig, M. R., Dodson, S. I., & Gough, L. (2001) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[2381:witorb]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 1,650
Secondary succession and the pattern of plant dominance along experimental nitrogen gradients
Tilman, D. (1987) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.2307/2937080 · Cited by 1,076
Cited by
Tuanmu, M., & Jetz, W. (2015) · Global Ecology and Biogeography · doi:10.1111/geb.12365 · Cited by 331
Metadata
- Authors
- Lundholm, J. T.
- Venue
- Journal of Vegetation Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-05-20
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 377-391
- ISSN
- 1100-9233 (ISSN-L)
- 1654-1103
- OpenAlex
- W2059012183
- Cited by
- 295
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 10.48
- 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
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.