The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Are New Zealand's Nothofagus species in equilibrium with their environment?
Abstract
Abstract. Past explanations of the large disjunctions in the distribution of New Zealand's four Nothofagus species have emphasized displacement during glacial cycles followed by slow re‐occupation of suitable sites, or the effects of plate tectonics coupled with ecological and/or environmental limitations to further spread. In this study the degree of equilibrium between Nothofagus distribution and environment was compared with that of other widespread tree species by statistical analysis. Generalized additive regression models were used to relate species distribution data to estimates of temperature, solar radiation, soil water deficit, atmospheric humidity, lithology and drainage. For each species, the amount of spatial patterning remaining unexplained by environment was assessed by adding a variable describing species presence/absence on adjacent plots. Results indicate that Nothofagus species occur more frequently in environments suboptimal for tree growth, i.e. having various combinations of cool temperatures, low winter solar radiation, high root‐zone water deficit, low humidity, and infertile granitic substrates. Despite these demonstrated preferences, they exhibit substantially more spatial clustering which is unexplained by environment, than most other widespread tree species. Predictions formed from regressions using environment alone confirm that several major Nothofagus disjunctions are not explicable in terms of the environmental factors used in this analysis, but more likely reflect the effects of historic displacement coupled with slowness to invade forest dominated by more rapidly dispersing endomycorrhizal species. The technique used in this study for detecting residual spatial autocorrelation after fitting explanatory variables has potentially wide application in other studies where either regression or ordination techniques are used for analysis of compositional data.
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
Cited by
Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology
Guisan, A., & Zimmermann, N. E. (2000) · Ecological Modelling · doi:10.1016/s0304-3800(00)00354-9 · Cited by 7,359
A statistical explanation of MaxEnt for ecologists
Elith, J., Phillips, S. J., Hastie, T., Dudík, M., Chee, Y. E., & Yates, C. J. (2011) · Diversity and Distributions · doi:10.1111/j.1472-4642.2010.00725.x · Cited by 6,699
Qiao, H., Soberón, J., & Peterson, A. T. (2015) · Methods in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.12397 · Cited by 448
Predictive mapping of alpine grasslands in Switzerland: Species versus community approach
Zimmermann, N. E., & Kienast, F. (1999) · Journal of Vegetation Science · doi:10.2307/3237182 · Cited by 396
COMPETITIVE INTERACTIONS BETWEEN TREE SPECIES IN NEW ZEALAND'S OLD-GROWTH INDIGENOUS FORESTS
Leathwick, J. R., & Austin, M. P. (2001) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[2560:cibtsi]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 243
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Leathwick, J. R.
- Venue
- Journal of Vegetation Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1998-02-24
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 719-732
- ISSN
- 1100-9233 (ISSN-L)
- 1654-1103
- OpenAlex
- W2022909546
- Cited by
- 168
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 12.45
- 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: Are New Zealand's Nothofagus species in equilibrium with their environment? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/3237290
- The paper
- Leathwick, J. R. (1998). Are New Zealand's Nothofagus species in equilibrium with their environment? Journal of Vegetation Science. https://doi.org/10.2307/3237290
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.