The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Landscape Ecology: What Is the State of the Science?
Abstract
▪ Abstract Landscape ecology focuses on the reciprocal interactions between spatial pattern and ecological processes, and it is well integrated with ecology. The field has grown rapidly over the past 15 years. The persistent influence of land-use history and natural disturbance on contemporary ecosystems has become apparent. Development of pattern metrics has largely stabilized, and they are widely used to relate landscape pattern to ecological responses. Analyses conducted at multiple scales have demonstrated the importance of landscape pattern for many taxa, and spatially mediated interspecific interactions are receiving increased attention. Disturbance remains prominent in landscape studies, and current research is addressing disturbance interactions. Integration of ecosystem and landscape ecology remains challenging but should enhance understanding of landscape function. Landscape ecology should continue to refine knowledge of when spatial heterogeneity is fundamentally important, rigorously test the generality of its concepts, and develop a more mechanistic understanding of the relationships between pattern and process.
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
Biological consequences of ecosystem fragmentation: A review
SAUNDERS, D. A., HOBBS, R. J., & MARGULES, C. R. (1991) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.1991.tb00384.x · Cited by 4,110
The Keystone Role of Bison in North American Tallgrass Prairie
Knapp, A. K., Blair, J. M., Briggs, J. M., Collins, S. L., Hartnett, D. C., Johnson, L. C., & Towne, E. G. (1999) · BioScience · doi:10.2307/1313492 · Cited by 834
Comparative evaluation of experimental approaches to the study of habitat fragmentation effects
McGarigal, K., & Cushman, S. A. (2002) · Ecological Applications · doi:10.1890/1051-0761(2002)012[0335:ceoeat]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 731
Fragmentation of Continental United States Forests
Riitters, K. H., Wickham, J. D., O'Neill, R. V., Jones, K. B., Smith, E. R., Coulston, J. W., Wade, T. G., & Smith, J. H. (2002) · Ecosystems · doi:10.1007/s10021-002-0209-2 · Cited by 385
Cited by
Peng, J., Xie, P., Liu, Y., & Ma, J. (2016) · Remote Sensing of Environment · doi:10.1016/j.rse.2015.11.027 · Cited by 603
Fettig, C. J., Klepzig, K. D., Billings, R. F., Munson, A. S., Nebeker, T. E., Negrón, J. F., & Nowak, J. T. (2007) · Forest Ecology and Management · doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2006.10.011 · Cited by 529
Simard, M., Romme, W. H., Griffin, J. M., & Turner, M. G. (2011) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.1890/10-1176.1 · Cited by 327
Self-citationInformation landscapes and sensory ecology of the Cambrian Radiation
Plotnick, R. E., Dornbos, S. Q., & Chen, J. (2010) · Paleobiology · doi:10.1666/08062.1 · Cited by 90
Columbia River Estuary ecosystem classification—Concept and application
Simenstad, C. A., Burke, J. L., O'Connor, J. E., Cannon, C., Heatwole, D. W., Ramirez, M. F., Waite, I. R., Counihan, T. D., & Jones, K. L. (2011) · Open-File Report · doi:10.3133/ofr20111228 · Cited by 42
Metadata
- Authors
- Turner, M. G.
- Venue
- Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics
- Publisher
- Annual Reviews
- Published
- 2005-12-01
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 319-344
- ISSN
- 1543-592X (ISSN-L)
- 1545-2069
- OpenAlex
- W2115981223
- Cited by
- 990
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 2.98
- 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.
