A Cartographic and GIS Perspective of Geodiversity Analysis: The Iberian Peninsula/ Spain Case Study

Pérez-Gómez, Rufino; Ibáñez, Juan‐José; Hoehne, Antonio Vázquez

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-09147-1_2

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…MacArthur and Wilson, 1967;Harner and Harper, 1976;Johnson and Simberloff, 1974;Williamson, 1981;Hupp, 1990;Triantis, 2003;Tews et al, 2003;Ibáñez and Feoli, 2013;, Báldi A, 2008; among many others). Most of these diversity-area relationship datasets also fit a power law (see bibliography in Ibáñez and Bockheim, 2013;Pérez-Gómez et al, 2014;Ibáñez, 2017).…”

Section: Geodiversity In the Ecological Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…At this date the bibliography on this topic is in its infancy (e.g. Pemberton, 2007;Parks and Mulligan, 2010;Matthews, 2014;Pérez-Gómez et al, 2014). For example, in some environments and lithological materials rainfall produces soil erosion and eroded sedimentary sequences inducing the development of badlands landscapes, increasing the biodiversity of such sites (Gallart et al 2013).…”

Section: Geodiversity In the Ecological Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Divergence in natural diversity studies: The need to standardize methods and goals

Ibáñez

Brevik

2019

CATENA

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There has been considerable interest in geodiversity and pedodiversity studies over the last approximately 30 years. Pedodiversity is considered part of geodiversity. However in practice they involved different experts and traditions. There are many common aspects that could be shared by all natural diversity studies, however, these common aspects have not been adequately studied and debated. Quantitative techniques that were developed and refined by biodiversity researchers over multiple decades of biodiversity studies should also be applicable to geodiversity and pedodiversity studies. Soil scientists studying pedodiversity followed the same techniques as mathematical ecologists, but geologists studying geodiversity focused on the implementation of proposals aimed at preserving geological heritage and popularising it among the general public. Therefore, pedodiversity and geodiversity diverged and it is not currently possible to compare the results of geodiversity and pedodiversity research. To reach a point where these research results could be compared, it will be necessary to (i) follow uniform mathematical procedures in both these fields and their subfields and (ii) develop universal taxonomies that will be followed for each of the natural resources (fossils, landforms, minerals, soils, etc.) being investigated. Geodiversity studies should move beyond the objective of proposing projects to preserve natural areas of geological value for economic and social purposes (geoparks, geotourism) and extend to attempts to quantify and compare biotic and abiotic diversity and *Manuscript Click here to view linked References its consequences. If we want to move forward, with a view to achieving a more mature discipline and a true new paradigm, both communities of experts must act synergistically.

show abstract