2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.06.015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Correlations in species richness between taxa depend on habitat, scale and landscape context

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
24
0
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
2
24
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…However, despite birds showing higher and more consistent spatial congruence with invertebrates than did other vertebrate groups, the level of congruence was still low. Birds are also typically poor surrogates for non-epigeic taxa (Lawton et al 1998, French 1999, Lund and Rahbek 2002, Vessby et al 2002, Williams et al 2006, Ekroos et al 2013, Foord et al 2013, Eglington et al 2015. These findings concur with the vast majority of bird-invertebrate congruence studies, which consistently show birds to be poor surrogates for ground-dwelling invertebrates (Burbidge et al 1992, Lawton et al 1998, Vessby et al 2002, de Andrade et al 2014).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, despite birds showing higher and more consistent spatial congruence with invertebrates than did other vertebrate groups, the level of congruence was still low. Birds are also typically poor surrogates for non-epigeic taxa (Lawton et al 1998, French 1999, Lund and Rahbek 2002, Vessby et al 2002, Williams et al 2006, Ekroos et al 2013, Foord et al 2013, Eglington et al 2015. These findings concur with the vast majority of bird-invertebrate congruence studies, which consistently show birds to be poor surrogates for ground-dwelling invertebrates (Burbidge et al 1992, Lawton et al 1998, Vessby et al 2002, de Andrade et al 2014).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ã P < 0.05; ÃÃ P < 0.01; ÃÃÃ P < 0.001. richness and composition, respectively (Yong et al 2018). Birds are also typically poor surrogates for non-epigeic taxa (Lawton et al 1998, French 1999, Lund and Rahbek 2002, Vessby et al 2002, Williams et al 2006, Ekroos et al 2013, Foord et al 2013, Eglington et al 2015.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An indicator for the wider biodiversity spectrum was not identified. There is probably a dichotomy here, since an indicator of wider spectrum of biodiversity could be better by indicating "more biodiversity", but at the same time could lose precision because the correlation between indicator and indicandum could be more susceptible to influences from variation of habitat, scale and landscape context (Ekroos et al, 2013). For example, the results showed that species richness/diversity of overall vascular plants and overall bryophytes were the most studied indicandums, but no correlation with strong evidence was found between them and their indicators.…”
Section: Importance Of Structural Indicatorsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…correlations in species richness between taxa vary with habitat, scale and landscape context (e.g. Ekroos et al, 2013). Vessby et al (2002) studied the extent of covariation between species richness of six different taxa (plants, birds, butterflies, bumblebees, ground beetles and dung beetles) in non-forested ecosystems (31 Swedish semi-natural grasslands) and found few correlations between taxa.…”
Section: Saproxylic Beetles 3 Standmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to the IUCN Habitats Classification Scheme [31] and the European Habitats Directive [32], natural habitat types can be mapped at a global scale by means of remote sensing in a harmonized way, avoiding the bias associated with sampling efforts [33][34][35][36][37]. Species data at the global scale might be biased due to differential sampling efforts related to location or taxa, whereas remote sensing data about habitats can be obtained more systematically and globally [38][39][40].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%