2013
DOI: 10.1890/12-1225.1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Exploring the ecological processes driving geographical patterns of breeding bird richness in British Columbia, Canada

Abstract: British Columbia (BC), Canada, has a diverse landscape that provides breeding habitat for > 300 avian species, and the recent development of the BC Breeding Bird Atlas data set presents key information for exploring the landscape conditions which lead to biological richness. We used the volunteer-collected raw breeding bird evidence data set to analyze the effects of sampling biases on spatial distribution of observed breeding bird species and implemented regression tree analysis (Random Forests) to examine th… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 65 publications
(115 reference statements)
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While originally applied as an index to describe plant communities (Coops et al, 2009a;Fitterer, Nelson, Coops, & Wulder, 2012) and animal diversity (Coops, Wulder, & Iwanicka, 2009b;Andrew, Wulder, Coops, & Baillargeon, 2012;Fitterer, Nelson, Coops, Wulder, & Mahony, 2013;Rickbeil, Coops, Drever, & Nelson, 2014b), DHI is also a useful predictor of individual coastal bird species distributions (Rickbeil et al, 2014a) and for describing forage conditions for moose (Alces alces) in Ontario, Canada (Michaud et al, 2014). The DHI estimates three components of landscape productivity -the yearly sum or overall productivity, the seasonality (the change between the maximum and minimum productivity throughout the year), and the minimum annual productivity (not considered here as all arctic vegetation goes to 0 in terms of fPAR values owing to the short growing season).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While originally applied as an index to describe plant communities (Coops et al, 2009a;Fitterer, Nelson, Coops, & Wulder, 2012) and animal diversity (Coops, Wulder, & Iwanicka, 2009b;Andrew, Wulder, Coops, & Baillargeon, 2012;Fitterer, Nelson, Coops, Wulder, & Mahony, 2013;Rickbeil, Coops, Drever, & Nelson, 2014b), DHI is also a useful predictor of individual coastal bird species distributions (Rickbeil et al, 2014a) and for describing forage conditions for moose (Alces alces) in Ontario, Canada (Michaud et al, 2014). The DHI estimates three components of landscape productivity -the yearly sum or overall productivity, the seasonality (the change between the maximum and minimum productivity throughout the year), and the minimum annual productivity (not considered here as all arctic vegetation goes to 0 in terms of fPAR values owing to the short growing season).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To date, satellite measures of productivity have been correlated with plant canopy cover [29,30] and overall productivity [23] in historical [31][32][33] and current contexts [34,35]. Relationships between productivity indicators and biodiversity have also been used to assess future spatial distributions of species [36] and biodiversity [26,37]. Time series of remotely sensed productivity components have been linked with climate data and applied to forecast future indicators of biodiversity [37][38][39][40][41].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Research has previously documented that wide-ranging and sensitive species, such as birds and butterflies, follow vegetation productivity trends modelled by remotely sensed imagery [20][21][22][23]27,28,81]. Notably, seasonal trends captured by the fPAR index have been able to distinguish spatial variation in bird species richness, including species' responses to seasonal and minimum annual productivity levels [23] and associations between composite DHI heterogeneity [81].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%