1987
DOI: 10.2307/2260303
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Test for Spatial Pattern in Vegetation Using a Monte-Carlo Simulation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
6
0

Year Published

1991
1991
1998
1998

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
1
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Markov data set #2). However, it also found the average of patch and gap values, as Pielou (1977) and Galiano et al (1987) predicted (e.g. Markov data sets #3 and #4).…”
Section: Simulated Datasupporting
confidence: 54%
“…Markov data set #2). However, it also found the average of patch and gap values, as Pielou (1977) and Galiano et al (1987) predicted (e.g. Markov data sets #3 and #4).…”
Section: Simulated Datasupporting
confidence: 54%
“…For example, a block size of 5 has an area of 5 m 2. Monte Carlo simulations were used to generate confidence intervals for each block size (Galiano et al 1987). New local variance has several advantages over other blocked-quadrat techniques including insensitivity to starting position along a transect and fewer limitations on block size (Ludwig & Goodall 1978;Ludwig 1979;Carpenter &Chaney 1983;Galiano 1983).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Greig-Smith's analysis of variance, for instance, only offers relatively rough measures of pattern as block-analysis only provides values of departure from randomness at l, 2, 4, 8... levels, omitting intermediate readings. Hill's (1973) Local Variances can be used with continuous intervals but clump sizes detected depend on interclump distances (see Galiano, 1982;Galiano et aL, 1984). So far no satisfactory or complete study of analytical methods of vegetation pattern has been carried out, although Ludwig (1979) and Cormack (1979) discussed several methods and recommended respectively Hill's Local Variances and Mead's (1974) randomization test.…”
Section: Methods Of Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%