Cited by 118

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Global Patterns of Tree Species Richness in Moist Forests: Distinguishing Ecological Influences and Historical Contingency

Ricklefs, Robert E., Latham, Roger Earl, Qian, Hong·1999·Oikos

Abstract

Robert E. Ricklefs, Roger Earl Latham, Hong Qian, Global Patterns of Tree Species Richness in Moist Forests: Distinguishing Ecological Influences and Historical Contingency, Oikos, Vol. 86, No. 2 (Aug., 1999), pp. 369-373

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/3546454

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Historical contingency, or historical trajectory, can play just as large a role in shaping observed ecological phenomena as modern climatic and abiotic conditions.

    “It has been suggested that the historical contingency, or historical trajectory, can play just as large a role in shaping observed ecological phenomena as modern climatic and abiotic conditions [64,65].”

    From Predicting pre-columbian anthropogenic soils in amazonia (2014) · cites this paper as [64]

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Ricklefs, R. E., Latham, R. E., & Qian, H.
Venue
Oikos
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1999-08
Volume
86
Issue
2
Pages
369
ISSN
0030-1299
Cited by
118
References
0

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