Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wg55d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-07T07:03:01.820Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - Determinants of the Shape of Species–Area Curves

from Part II - Diversity–Area Relationships: The Different Types and Underlying Factors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 March 2021

By
Even Tjørve ,
Kathleen M. C. Tjørve ,
Eva Šizlingová  and
Arnošt L. Šizling
Edited by
Thomas J. Matthews ,
Kostas A. Triantis  and
Robert J. Whittaker
Thomas J. Matthews
Affiliation:
University of Birmingham
Kostas A. Triantis
Affiliation:
National and Kapodistrian University of Athens
Robert J. Whittaker
Affiliation:
University of Oxford
Get access

Summary

The search for the mechanisms that drive the species–area relationship (SAR) has been complicated by a number of factors. First, the different proposed mechanisms have generally been considered to be mutually exclusive. Second, due to the misinterpretation of curve shapes after (log) transformation of one or both of the axes. Third, due to confusion about different types of SAR, such as isolate and sample area SARs. These two SAR types are underpinned, at least partly, by different factors (or drivers), which act in combination. The different patterns and processes that drive the SAR can be organized according to a hierarchy: from underlying environmental patterns at the bottom, through the processes driving species diversity patterns, up to the research and sampling design. Environmental patterns include both biological and geographical patterns, while processes may be stochastic, evolutionary or ecological. The resultant species diversity patterns include species range patterns, species densities, species abundances and the spatial distribution of individuals of a species. Although the individuals of a species are rarely randomly distributed in space, the random placement model provides a useful null model that can be used to partition the effects of species abundances and the spatial distributions of individuals on SARs.

Keywords

Species–area relationshipISARsSACsmechanismsspecies abundance distributionspatial distribution of individualsrandom placement modelsampling designstochastic patternsevolutionary patterns
Type
Chapter
Information
The Species–Area Relationship
Theory and Application
 , pp. 78 - 106
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arrhenius, O. (1920) Yta och arter. I. Svensk Botanisk Tidsskrift, 14, 327–329.Google Scholar
Arrhenius, O. (1921) Species and area. Journal of Ecology, 9, 95–99.Google Scholar
Barnett, D. T. & Stohlgren, T. J. (2003) A nested-intensity design for surveying plant data. Biodiversity and Conservation, 12, 255–278.Google Scholar
Begon, M., Harper, J. L. & Townsend, C. R. (1990) Ecology: Individuals, populations and communities, 2nd ed. Boston, MD: Blackwell Scientific Publications.Google Scholar
Brown, J. H. (1971) Mammals on mountaintops: Nonequilibrium insular biogeography. The American Naturalist, 105, 467–478.Google Scholar
Brown, J. H., Gillooly, J. F., West, G. B. & Savage, V. M. (2003) The next step in macroecology: From general empirical patterns to universal ecological laws. Macroecology: Concepts and consequences (ed. by Blackburn, T. M. and Gaston, K. J.), pp. 408–423. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Burns, K. C., McHardy, P. & Pledger, S. (2009) The small-island effect: Fact or artefact? Ecography, 32, 269–276.Google Scholar
Cam, E., Nichols, J. D., Hines, J. E., Sauer, J. R., Alpizar-Jara, R. & Flather, C. H. (2002) Disentangling sampling and ecological explanations underlying species–area relationships. Ecology, 83, 1118–1130.Google Scholar
Chase, J. M., Gooriah, L., May, F., Ryberg, W. A., Schuler, M. S., Craven, D. & Knight, T. M. (2019) A framework for disentangling ecological mechanisms underlying the island species–area relationship. Frontiers of Biogeography, 11, e40844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, B. (1981) On random placement and species–area relations. Mathematical Biosciences, 54, 191–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, B. D., Mares, M. A., Willig, M. R. & Hsieh, Y.-H. (1982) Randomness, area and species richness. Ecology, 64, 1121–1133.Google Scholar
Colwell, R. K. & Lees, D. C. (2000) The mid-domain effect: Geometric constraints on the geography of species richness. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 15, 70–76.Google Scholar
Condit, R., Hubbell, S. P., LaFrankie, J. V., Sukumar, R., Monokaran, N., Foster, R. B. & Ashton, P. S. (1996) Species–area and species–individual relationships for tropical trees: A comparison of three 50-ha plots. Journal of Ecology, 84, 549–562.Google Scholar
Connell, J. H. (1978) Diversity in tropical rainforests and coral reefs. Science, 199, 1302–1310.Google Scholar
Connor, E. F. & McCoy, E. D. (1979) The statistics and biology of the species–area relationship. The American Naturalist, 113, 791–833.Google Scholar
Connor, E. F. & McCoy, E. D. (2001) Species–area relationships. Encyclopedia of biodiversity, vol. 5 (ed. by Levin, S. A.), pp. 397–411. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Currie, D. J. & Fritz, J. T. (1993) Global patterns of animal abundance and species energy use. Oikos, 67, 56–68.Google Scholar
Dengler, J. (2008) Sampling-design effects on properties of species–area relationships – A case study from Estonian dry grassland communities. Folia Geobotanica, 43, 289–304.Google Scholar
Dengler, J. (2009) Which function describes the species–area relationship best? A review and empirical evaluation. Journal of Biogeography, 36, 728–744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diamond, J. M. (1975) The island dilemma: Lessons of modern biogeographic studies for the design of natural reserves. Biological Conservation, 7, 129–146.Google Scholar
Dunning, J. B., Danielson, B. J. & Pulliam, H. R. (1992) Ecological processes that affect populations in complex landscapes. Oikos, 65, 169–175.Google Scholar
Economo, E. P., Janda, M., Guénard, B. & Sarnat, E. (2017) Assembling a species–area curve through colonization, speciation and human-mediated introduction. Journal of Biogeography, 44, 1088–1097.Google Scholar
Engen, S. (1977) Exponential and logarithmic species–area curves. The America Naturalist, 111, 591–594.Google Scholar
Fattorini, S. (2002) Biogeography of the tenebrionid beetles (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae) on the Aegean Islands (Greece). Journal of Biogeography, 29, 49–67.Google Scholar
Fattorini, S. (2006) Spatial patterns of diversity in the tenebrionid beetles (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae) of the Aegean Islands (Greece). Evolutionary Ecology Research, 8, 237–263.Google Scholar
Fisher, R. A., Corbet, A. S. & Williams, C. B. (1943) The relation between the number of species and the number of individuals in a random sample of an animal population. Journal of Animal Ecology, 12, 42–58.Google Scholar
Franzén, M., Schweiger, O. & Betzholtz, P.-E. (2012) Species–area relationships are controlled by species traits. PLoS One, 7, e37359.Google Scholar
Freeman, M. T., Oliver, P. I. & van Aarde, R. J. (2018) Matrix transformation alters species–area relationships in fragmented coastal forests. Landscape Ecology, 33, 307–322.Google Scholar
Gilpin, M. E. & Diamond, J. M. (1976) Calculation of immigration and extinction curves from the species–area–distance relation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 73, 4130–4134.Google Scholar
Gray, J. S. (1986) Species-abundance patterns. Organization of communities past and present, the 27th symposium of the British Ecological Society, Aberystwyth (ed. by Gee, J. H. R. and Giller, P. S.), pp. 53–67. Oxford: Blackwell Science.Google Scholar
Gray, J. S., Ugland, K. I. & Lambshead, J. (2004) On species accumulation and species–area curves. Global Ecology & Biogeography, 13, 567–568.Google Scholar
Green, J. L. & Ostling, A. (2003) Endemics–area relationships: The influence of species dominance and spatial aggregation. Ecology, 84, 3090–3097.Google Scholar
Green, J. L. & Plotkin, J. B. (2007) A statistical theory for sampling species abundances. Ecology Letters, 10, 1037–1045.Google Scholar
Haddad, N. M., Bruvig, L. A., Clobert, J., Davies, K. F., Gonzales, A., Holt, R. D., Lovejoy, T. E., Sexton, J. O., Austin, M. P., Collins, C. D., Cook, W. M., Damschen, E. I., Ewers, R. M., Foster, B. L., Jenkins, C. N., King, A. J., Laurance, W. F., Levey, D. J., Margules, C. R., Melbourne, B. A., Nicholls, A. O., Orrock, J. L., Song, D.-X. & Townshend, J. R. (2015) Habitat fragmentation and its lasting impact on Earth’s ecosystems. Science Advances, 1, e1500052.Google Scholar
Halley, J. M., Sgardeli, V. & Triantis, K. A. (2014) Extinction debt and the species–area relationship: A neutral perspective. Global Ecology & Biogeography, 23, 113–123.Google Scholar
Hanski, I. (1994) A practical model of metapopulation dynamics. Journal of Animal Ecology, 63, 151–162.Google Scholar
Hanski, I. (1999) Metapopulation ecology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hanski, I. & Gyllenberg, M. (1997) Uniting two general patterns in the distribution of species. Science, 275, 397–400.Google Scholar
Hart, D. D. & Horwitz, R. J. (1991) Habitat diversity and the species–area relationship: Alternative models and tests. Habitat structure, population and community biology series, vol. 8 (ed. by Bell, S. S., McCoy, E. D. and Mushinsky, H. R.), pp. 47–68. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Harte, J. (2011) Maximum entropy and ecology: A theory of abundance, distribution, and energetics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Harte, J., Kinzig, A. & Green, J. (1999) Self-similarity in the distribution and abundance of species. Science, 284, 334–336.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harte, J., Smith, A. B. & Storch, D. (2009) Biodiversity scales from plots to biomes with a universal species–area curve. Ecology Letters, 12, 789–797.Google Scholar
Hastings, A. & Harrison, S. (1994) Metapopulation dynamics and genetics. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 25, 167–188.Google Scholar
Hawkins, B. A., Field, R., Cornell, H. V., Currie, D. J., Guégan, J.-F., Kaufman, D. M., Kerr, J. T., Mittelbach, G. G., Oberdorff, T., O'Brien, E. M., Porter, E. E. & Turner, J. R. G. (2003) Energy, water, and broad-scale geographic patterns of species richness. Ecology, 84, 3105–3117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
He, F. & Hubbell, S. (2013) Estimating extinction from species–area relationships: Why the numbers do not add up. Ecology, 94, 1905–1912.Google Scholar
He, F. & Legendre, P. (1996) On species–area relations. The American Naturalist, 148, 719–737.Google Scholar
He, F. & Legendre, P. (2002) Species diversity patterns derived from species–area models. Ecology, 83, 1185–1198.Google Scholar
He, F., Legendre, P. & LaFrankie, V. (1996) Spatial patterns of diversity in a tropical rain forest of Malaysia. Journal of Biogeography, 23, 57–74.Google Scholar
Hill, J. L., Curran, P. J. & Fookolady, G. M. (1994) The effect of sampling on the species–area curve. Global Ecology & Biogeography Letters, 4, 97–106.Google Scholar
Hopkins, B. (1955) The species–area relations of plant communities. Journal of Ecology, 43, 409–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubbell, S. P. (2001) The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hurlbert, A. H. (2004) Species–energy relationships and habitat complexity in bird communities. Ecology Letters, 7, 714–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Irie, H. & Tokita, K. (2012) Species–area relationship for power-law species abundance distribution. International Journal of Biomathematics, 5, 1260014.Google Scholar
Keeley, J. E. & Fotheringham, C. J. (2005) Plot shape effects on plant species diversity measurements. Journal of Vegetation Science, 16, 249–256.Google Scholar
Kohn, D. D. & Walsh, D. M. (1994) Plant species richness – the effect of island size and habitat diversity. Journal of Ecology, 82, 367–377.Google Scholar
Kolasa, J., Manne, L. L. & Pandit, S. N. (2012) Species–area relationships arise from interaction of habitat heterogeneity and species pool. Hydrobiologia, 685, 135–144.Google Scholar
Kraft, N. J. B., Adler, P. B., Godoy, O., James, E. C., Fuller, S. & Levine, J. M. (2014) Community assembly, coexistence and the environmental filtering metaphor. Functional Ecology, 29, 592–599.Google Scholar
Kunin, W. E., Harte, J., He, F, Hui, C., Jobe, R., Ostling, A., Polce, C., Šizling, A. L., Smith, A. B., Smith, K., Smart, S. M., Storch., D, Tjørve, E., Ugland, K.-I., Ulrich, W. & Varma, V. (2018) Upscaling biodiversity: Estimating the species–area relationship from small samples. Ecological Monographs, 88, 170–187.Google Scholar
Kůrka, P., Šizling, A. L & Rosindell, J. (2010) Analytical evidence for scale-invariance in the shape of species abundance distributions. Mathematical Biosciences, 223, 151–159.Google Scholar
Kylin, H. (1923) Växtsociologiska randanmärkningar. Botaniska Notiser, 1923, 161–234.Google Scholar
Levins, R. (1969) Some genetic and demographic consequences of environmental heterogeneity for biological control. Bulletin of the Entomological Society of America, 15, 237–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levins, R. (1970) Extinction. Some mathematical questions in biology, vol. 2 (ed. by Gerstenhaber, M.). Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.Google Scholar
Lomolino, M. V. (2001) The species–area relationship: New challenges for an old pattern. Progress in Physical Geography, 25, 1–21.Google Scholar
Losos, J. B. & Parent, C. E. (2009) The speciation–area relationship. The theory of island biogeography revisited (ed. by Losos, J. B. and Ricklefs, R. E.), pp. 415–438. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Losos, J. B. & Schluter, D. (2000) Analysis of an evolutionary species–area relationship. Nature, 408, 847–850.Google Scholar
MacArthur, R. H. (1957) On the relative abundance of bird species. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 43, 293–295.Google Scholar
MacArthur, R. H. & Wilson, E. O. (1963) An equilibrium theory of insular zoogeography. Evolution, 17, 373–387.Google Scholar
MacArthur, R. H. & Wilson, E. O. (1967) The theory of island biogeography. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Magurran, A. E. (1988) Ecological diversity and its measurement. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Martín, H. G. & Goldenfeld, N. (2006) On the origin and robustness of power-law species–area relationships in ecology. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 103, 10310–10315.Google Scholar
Matter, S. F., Hanski, I. & Gyllenberg, M. (2002) A test of a metapopulation model of the species–area relationship. Journal of Biogeography, 29, 977–983.Google Scholar
May, R. M. (1975) Patterns of species abundance and diversity. Ecology and evolution of communities (ed. by Cody, M. L. and Diamond, J. M.), pp. 81–120. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
McGill, B. J. (2010) Towards a unification of unified theories. Ecology Letters, 13, 627–642.Google Scholar
McGill, B. J. (2011) Species abundance distributions. Biological diversity: Frontiers in measurement and assessment (ed. by Magurran, A. E. and McGill, B. J.), pp. 105–122. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McGill, B. & Collins, C. (2003) A unified theory for macroecology based on spatial patterns of abundance. Evolutionary Ecology Research, 5, 469–492.Google Scholar
McGuinness, K. A. (1984) Species–area relationships of communities on intertidal boulders: Testing the null hypothesis. Journal of Biogeography, 11, 439–456.Google Scholar
Newmark, W. D. (1986) Species–area relationship and its determinants for mammals in western North American national parks. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 28, 83–98.Google Scholar
Nilsson, S. G., Bengtson, J. & Ås, S. (1988) Habitat diversity or area per se? Species richness of woody plants, carabid beetles and land snails on islands. Journal of Animal Ecology, 57, 685–704.Google Scholar
Öckinger, E., Lindborg, R., Sjödin, N. E. & Bommarco, R. (2012) Landscape matrix modifies richness of plants and insects in grassland fragments. Ecography, 35, 259–267.Google Scholar
Olszewski, T. D. (2004) A unified mathematical framework for the measurement of richness and evenness within and among multiple communities. Oikos, 104, 377–387.Google Scholar
Ovaskainen, O. & Hanski, I. (2003) The species–area relationship derived from species-specific incidence functions. Ecology Letters, 6, 903–909.Google Scholar
Palmer, M. W., Earls, P. G., Hoagland, B. W., White, P.S. & Wohlgemuth, T. (2002) Quantitative tools for perfecting species lists. Environmetrics, 13, 121–137.Google Scholar
Panitsa, M., Trigas, P., Iatrou, G. & Sfenthourakis, S. (2010) Factors affecting species richness and endemism on land-bridge islands – an example from the East Aegean archipelago. Acta Oecologica, 36, 431–437.Google Scholar
Panitsa, M., Tzanouakis, D., Triantis, K. A. & Sfenthourakis, S. (2006) Patterns of species richness on very small islands: The plants of the Aegean archipelago. Journal of Biogeography, 33, 1223–1234.Google Scholar
Pardini, R., Bueno, A. D. A., Gardner, T. A., Prado, P. I. & Metzger, J. P. (2010) Beyond the fragmentation threshold hypothesis: Regime shifts in biodiversity across fragmented landscapes. PLoS One, 5, e13666.Google Scholar
Picard, N., Karambé, M. & Birnbaum, P. (2004) Species–area curve and spatial pattern. Écoscience, 11, 45–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pielou, E. C. (1975) Ecological diversity. New York: Wiley-Interscience.Google Scholar
Pielou, E. C. (1977) Mathematical ecology. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Pigolotti, S. & Cencini, M. (2009) Speciation-rate dependence in species–area relationships. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 260, 83–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Plotkin, J. B., Potts, M. D., Leslie, N., Manokaran, N., LaFrankie, J. & Ashton, P. S. (2000) Species–area curves, spatial aggregation, and habitat specialization in tropical forests. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 207, 81–99.Google Scholar
Powell, K. I. (2013) Invasive plants have scale-dependent effects on diversity by altering species–area relationships. Science, 339, 316–318.Google Scholar
Preston, C. D., Pearman, D. A. & Dines, T. D. (2002) New atlas of the British & Irish flora. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Preston, F. W. (1948) The commonness, and rarity, of species. Ecology, 29, 254–283.Google Scholar
Preston, F. W. (1960) Time and space and the variation of species. Ecology, 41, 611–627.Google Scholar
Preston, F. W. (1962) The canonical distribution of commonness and rarity: Part I & II. Ecology, 43, 185–215, 410–432.Google Scholar
Pueyo, S. (2006) Self-similarity in species–area relationship and in species abundance distribution. Oikos, 112, 156–162.Google Scholar
Pulliam, H. R. (1988) Sources, sinks, and population regulation. The American Naturalist, 132, 652–661.Google Scholar
Qian, H., Ricklefs, R. E. & White, P. S. (2005) Beta diversity of angiosperms in temperate floras of eastern Asia and eastern North America. Ecology Letters, 8, 15–22.Google Scholar
Qiao, X., Tang, Z., Wang, S., Liu, Y. & Fang, J. (2012) Effects of community structure on the species–area relationship in China's forests. Ecography, 35, 1117–1123.Google Scholar
Ricklefs, R. E. (2006) The unified neutral theory of biodiversity: Do the numbers add up? Ecology, 87, 1424–1431.Google Scholar
Ricklefs, R. E. & Lovette, I. J. (1999) The roles of island area per se and habitat diversity in the species–area relationships of four Lesser Antillean faunal groups. Journal of Animal Ecology, 68, 1142–1160.Google Scholar
Romell, L. G. (1920) Sur la régle de distribution de fréquences. Svensk Botanisk Tidsskrift, 14, 1–20.Google Scholar
Romell, L. G. (1930) Comments on Raunkiær's and similar methods of vegetation analysis and the ‘law of frequency’. Ecology, 11, 598–596.Google Scholar
Rosenzweig, M. L. (1995) Species diversity in space and time. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rosindell, J., Hubbell, S. P., He, F., Harmon, L. J. & Etienne, R. S. (2012) The case for ecological neutral theory. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 27, 203–208.Google Scholar
Scheiner, S. M. (2003) Six types of species–area curves. Global Ecology & Biogeography, 12, 441–447.Google Scholar
Scheiner, S. M., Chiarucci, A., Fox, G. A., Helmus, M. R., McGlinn, D. J. & Willig, M. R. (2011) The underpinnings of the relationship of species richness with space and time. Ecological Monographs, 81, 195–213.Google Scholar
Scheiner, S. M., Cox, S. B., Willig, M., Mittelbach, G. G., Osenberg, C. & Kaspari, M. (2000) Species richness, species–area curves and Simpson's paradox. Evolutionary Ecology Research, 2, 791–802.Google Scholar
Sfenthourakis, S. (1996) The species–area relationship of terrestrial isopods (Isopoda; Oniscidea) from the Aegean archipelago (Greece): A comparative study. Global Ecology & Biogeography Letters, 5, 149–157.Google Scholar
Shmida, A. & Wilson, M. V. (1985) Biological determinants of species diversity. Journal of Biogeography, 12, 1–20.Google Scholar
Šizling, A. L. & Storch, D. (2004) Power-law species–area relationships and self-similar species distributions within finite areas. Ecology Letters, 7, 60–68.Google Scholar
Šizling, A. L., Kunin, W. E., Šizlingová, E., Reif, J. & Storch, D. (2011) Between geometry and biology: The problem of universality of the species–area relationship. The American Naturalist, 178, 602–611.Google Scholar
Šizling, A. L., Šizlingová, E., Tjørve, E., Tjørve, K. M. C. & Kunin, W. E. (2017) How to allow SAR collapse across local and continental scales: A resolution of the controversy between Storch et al. (2012) and Lazarina et al. (2013). Ecography, 40, 971–981.Google Scholar
Šizling, A. L., Storch, D., Reif, J. & Gaston, K. J. (2009b) Invariance in species-abundance distributions. Theoretical Ecology, 2, 89–103.Google Scholar
Šizling, A. L., Storch, D., Šizlingová, E. D., Reif, J. & Gaston, K. J. (2009a) Species abundance distribution results from a spatial analogy of central limit theorem. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 106, 6691–6695.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Solow, A. R. & Smith, W. (1991) Detecting cluster in a heterogeneous community sampled by quadrats. Biometrics, 47, 311–217.Google Scholar
Stein, A., Gerstner, K. & Kreft, H. (2014) Environmental heterogeneity as a universal driver of species richness across taxa, biomes and spatial scales. Ecology Letters, 17, 866–880.Google Scholar
Storch, D., Šizling, A. L. & Gaston, K. J. (2003) Geometry of the species–area relationship in central European birds: Testing the mechanism. Journal of Animal Ecology, 72, 509–519.Google Scholar
Svedberg, T. (1922) Statistisk vegetationsanalys, några synspunkter. Svensk Botanisk Tidsskrift, 16, 197–205.Google Scholar
Tjørve, E. (2002) Habitat size and number in multi-habitat landscapes: A model approach based on species–area curves. Ecography, 25, 17–24.Google Scholar
Tjørve, E. (2003) Shapes and functions of species–area curves: A review of possible models. Journal of Biogeography, 30, 827–835.Google Scholar
Tjørve, E. & Tjørve, K. (2017) Species–area relationship. eLS (Encyclopedia of Life Sciences Online), pp. 1–9. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Tjørve, E. & Turner, W.R. (2009) The importance of samples and isolates for species–area relationships. Ecography, 32, 391–400.Google Scholar
Tjørve, E., Kunin, W. E., Polce, C. & Tjørve, K. M. C. (2008) The species–area relationship: Separating the effects of species-abundance and spatial distribution. Journal of Ecology, 96, 1141–1151.Google Scholar
Tjørve, E., Tjørve, K. M. C., Šizlingová, E. & Šizling, A. L. (2018) Great theories of species diversity in space and why they were forgotten: The beginnings of a spatial ecology and the Nordic early 20th-century botanists. Journal of Biogeography, 45, 530–540.Google Scholar
Tokeshi, M. (1993). Species abundance patterns and community structure. Advances in Ecological Research, 24, 111–186.Google Scholar
Tolimieri, N. (2007) Patterns in species richness, species density, and evenness in groundfish assemblages on the continental slope of the U.S Pacific coast. Environmental Biology of Fishes, 78, 241–256.Google Scholar
Triantis, K. A., Guilhaumon, F. & Whittaker, R. J. (2012) The island species–area relationship: Biology and statistics. Journal of Biogeography, 39, 215–231.Google Scholar
Triantis, K. A., Mylonas, M., Lika, K. & Vardinoyannis, K. (2003) A model for the species–area–habitat relationship. Journal of Biogeography, 30, 19–27.Google Scholar
Triantis, K. A., Sfenthourakis, S. & Mylonas, M. (2008) Biodiversity patterns of terrestrial isopods from two island groups in the Aegean Sea (Greece): Species–area relationship, small island effect and nestedness. Écoscience, 15, 169–181.Google Scholar
Triantis, K. A., Vardinoyannis, K., Tsolaki, E. P., Botsaris, I., Lika, K. & Mylonas, M. (2006) Re-approaching the small island effect. Journal of Biogeography, 33, 914–923.Google Scholar
Turner, W. R. & Tjørve, E. (2005) Scale-dependence in species–area relationships. Ecography, 28, 721–730.Google Scholar
Ulrich, W., Kusumoto, B., Shiono, T. & Kubota, Y. (2016) Climatic and geographic correlates of global forest tree species-abundance distributions and community evenness. Journal of Vegetation Science, 27, 295–305.Google Scholar
Weigelt, P. & Kreft, H. (2013) Quantifying island isolation – insights from global patterns of insular plant species richness. Ecography, 36, 417–429.Google Scholar
Welter-Schultes, F. W. & Williams, M. R. (1999) History, island area and habitat availability determine land snail species richness of Agean islands. Journal of Biogeography, 26, 239–249.Google Scholar
Whittaker, R. H. (1965) Dominance and diversity in land plant communities. Science, 147, 250–260.Google Scholar
Whittaker, R. J. & Fernandéz-Palacios, J. M. (2007) Island biogeography: Ecology, evolution, and conservation, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Williams, C. B. (1943) Area and number of species. Nature, 152, 264–267.Google Scholar
Williams, C. B. (1964) Patterns in the balance of nature and related problems in quantitative ecology. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Williams, M. R. (1995) An extreme-value function model of the species incidence and species–area relations. Ecology, 76, 2607–2616.Google Scholar
Williams, M. R. (1996) Species–area curves: The need to include zeroes. Global Ecology & Biogeography Letters, 5, 91–93.Google Scholar
Williamson, M. (1988) Relationship of species number to area, distance and other variables. Analytical biogeography (ed. by Myers, A. A. and Giller, P. S.), pp. 91–115. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×