Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 182

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Species Numbers, Density Compensation, and Colonizing Ability of Lizards on Islands in the Gulf of California

Case, Ted J.·1975·Ecology

Abstract

The distribution of lizard species and numbers on islands in the Gulf of California was examined in light of island biogeographic theory. Using linear multiple regression techniques with the percent completeness of the island's lizard fauna as the dependent variable (LS), the relationship and predictive power of several island independent variables (in original and transformed forms) were explored. The results of this analysis differed sharply for different subsets of islands. The independent variable accounting for the most variance in LS for oceanic islands was island area; their distance from the mainland explained most of the residual variance. For land—bridge islands, maximum island elevation was the most predictive single variable, and island distance was least important. In both these island groups and considering all the islands together, island area, elevation, and the number of perennial plant species were highly correlated and explained little of each others residual variance. On 12 islands, diversity of shrub volume was also measured and was found to have less predictive power than the other variables considered. Life history attributes of each lizard species were gleaned from the literature and compared with the respective colonizing abilities of the species. In general species occurring on many Gulf islands (e.g., Uta stansburiana) may reach high mainland population densities, have potentially high birth rates and high death rates, and may be habitat generalists. Species absent from most islands and most likely to go extinct on land—bridge islands (e.g., Xantusia vigilis) have the converse of these attributes. The reasons for the divergence of these results and those expected from predictions is discussed. Lizard fauna relaxation times were calculated for land—bridge islands and were found to be inversely related to island area as predicted from island biogeographic theory. Extinction rates for lizards are about one half as high as those calculated for birds and mammals. Timed searches for lizards were also performed on most of the islands and the adjacent Baja California peninsula. These revealed that the numbers of Uta and total lizard numbers were both inversely related to the number of lizard species occupying an island. The probable reasons for such excess density compensation were examined, and it was concluded that differences in pedation intensity, insect productivity, and possibly competitive interference account for the extremely high number of lizards on some small isolated islands.

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 · 10.2307/1935296

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.

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

Cited by

See all 182

Metadata

Authors
Case, T. J.
Venue
Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1975-01
Volume
56
Issue
1
Pages
3-18
ISSN
0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1979492398
Cited by
182
References
0
FWCI
8.27
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: Species Numbers, Density Compensation, and Colonizing Ability of Lizards on Islands in the Gulf of California. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1935296
The paper
Case, T. J. (1975). Species Numbers, Density Compensation, and Colonizing Ability of Lizards on Islands in the Gulf of California. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.2307/1935296

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.