The pervasive influence of island biogeography theory on forest fragmentation research has often led to a misleading conceptualization of landscapes as areas of forest/habitat and 'non-forest/non-habitat' and an overriding focus on processes within forest remnants at the expense of research in the human-modified matrix. The matrix, however, may be neither uniformly unsuitable as habitat nor serve as a fully-absorbing barrier to the dispersal of forest taxa. In this paper, we present a conceptual model that addresses how forest habitat loss and fragmentation affect biodiversity through reduction of the resource base, subdivision of populations, alterations of species interactions and disturbance regimes, modifications of microclimate and increases in the presence of invasive species and human pressures on remnants. While we acknowledge the importance of changes associated with the forest remnants themselves (e.g. decreased forest area and increased isolation of forest patches), we stress that the extent, intensity and permanence of alterations to the matrix will have an overriding influence on area and isolation effects and emphasize the potential roles of the matrix as not only a barrier but also as habitat, source and conduit. Our intention is to argue for shifting the examination of forest fragmentation effects away from a patch-based perspective focused on factors such as patch area and distance metrics to a landscape mosaic perspective that recognizes the importance of gradients in habitat conditions.
. Numerous ecological studies use Principal Components Analysis (PCA) for exploratory analysis and data reduction. Determination of the number of components to retain is the most crucial problem confronting the researcher when using PCA. An incorrect choice may lead to the underextraction of components, but commonly results in overextraction. Of several methods proposed to determine the significance of principal components, Parallel Analysis (PA) has proven consistently accurate in determining the threshold for significant components, variable loadings, and analytical statistics when decomposing a correlation matrix. In this procedure, eigenvalues from a data set prior to rotation are compared with those from a matrix of random values of the same dimensionality (p variables and n samples). PCA eigenvalues from the data greater than PA eigenvalues from the corresponding random data can be retained. All components with eigenvalues below this threshold value should be considered spurious. We illustrate Parallel Analysis on an environmental data set. We reviewed all articles utilizing PCA or Factor Analysis (FA) from 1987 to 1993 from Ecology, Ecological Monographs, Journal of Vegetation Science and Journal of Ecology. Analyses were first separated into those PCA which decomposed a correlation matrix and those PCA which decomposed a covariance matrix. Parallel Analysis (PA) was applied for each PCA/FA found in the literature. Of 39 analy ses (in 22 articles), 29 (74.4 %) considered no threshold rule, presumably retaining interpretable components. According to the PA results, 26 (66.7 %) overextracted components. This overextraction may have resulted in potentially misleading interpretation of spurious components. It is suggested that the routine use of PA in multivariate ordination will increase confidence in the results and reduce the subjective interpretation of supposedly objective methods.
Aims Classification of vegetation is an essential tool to describe, understand, predict and manage biodiversity. Given the multiplicity of approaches to classify vegetation, it is important to develop international consensus around a set of general guidelines and purpose‐specific standard protocols. Before these goals can be achieved, however, it is necessary to identify and understand the different choices that are made during the process of classifying vegetation. This paper presents a framework to facilitate comparisons between broad‐scale plot‐based classification approaches. Results Our framework is based on the distinction of four structural elements (plot record, vegetation type, consistent classification section and classification system) and two procedural elements (classification protocol and classification approach). For each element we describe essential properties that can be used for comparisons. We also review alternative choices regarding critical decisions of classification approaches; with a special focus on the procedures used to define vegetation types from plot records. We illustrate our comparative framework by applying it to different broad‐scale classification approaches. Conclusions Our framework will be useful for understanding and comparing plot‐based vegetation classification approaches, as well as for integrating classification systems and their sections.
Niche and neutral theories emphasize different processes contributing to the maintenance of species diversity. In this study, we calculated the local contribution to beta diversity (LCBD) of every cell, using variation partitioning in combination with spatial distance and environmental variables of the 25-ha Badagongshan plot (BDGS), to determine the contribution of environmentally-related variation versus pure spatial variation. We used topography and soil characteristics as environmental variables, distance-based Moran’s eigenvectors maps (dbMEM) to describe spatial relationships among cells and redundancy analysis (RDA) to apportion the variation in beta diversity into three components: pure environmental, spatially-structured environmental, and pure spatial. Results showed LCBD values were negatively related to number of common species and positively related to number of rare species. Environment and space jointly explained ~60% of the variation in species composition; soil variables alone explained 21.6%, slightly more than the topographic variables that explained 15.7%; topography and soil together explained 27%, slightly inferior to spatial variables that explained 34%. The BDGS forest was controlled both by the spatial and environmental variables, and the results were consistent across different life forms and life stages.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.