2019
DOI: 10.23855/preslia.2019.093
View full text |Buy / Rent full text
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: Theoretically the concept of species ecological specialization is very useful, however, practically it is often difficult to quantify due to a lack of relevant environmental data. We introduce the Ecological Specialization Index (ESI), which describes the degree of specialization of a species based on its realized niche along multiple environmental gradients and is conceptually based on the co-occurrence specialization metric theta introduced by Fridley et al. (2007). We estimated ESI for species of the Czech … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
9
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

2
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
(11 reference statements)
2
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, in a study on about 1200 plant species in the French Alps, specialist species were found to be more geographically restricted than generalist species (Boulangeat et al, 2012). The same pattern was found in the Czech flora (Zelený & Chytrý, 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 66%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For example, in a study on about 1200 plant species in the French Alps, specialist species were found to be more geographically restricted than generalist species (Boulangeat et al, 2012). The same pattern was found in the Czech flora (Zelený & Chytrý, 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 66%
“…Both mechanisms would be reflected in a larger distribution range. Most studies have confirmed such a positive correlation (Boulangeat et al, 2012;Brown, 1984;Kambach et al, 2019;Slatyer et al, 2013;Sporbert et al, 2019;Zelený & Chytrý, 2019). For example, in a study on about 1200 plant species in the French Alps, specialist species were found to be more geographically restricted than generalist species (Boulangeat et al, 2012).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…Several ecological variables were prepared based on various analyses of the national dataset of vegetation plots (Chytrý & Rafajová 2003), e.g. ecological specialization indices (Zelený & Chytrý 2019).…”
Section: Origin Of the Data On Plant Characteristicsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…I Ecological specialization index for all vegetation types (2.69-7.95) I Ecological specialization index for non-forest vegetation (2.63-7.49) I Ecological specialization index for forest vegetation (2.61-7.95) I Taxon weights of ESI for all vegetation types (10-5020; theoretical maximum 30,115) I Taxon weights of ESI for non-forest vegetation: (10-4542; theoretical maximum 24,712) I Taxon weights of ESI for forest vegetation: (10-2032; theoretical maximum 5403) Data source and citation: Zelený & Chytrý (2019).…”
Section: Dominant Taxonmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The effect of provenance on pollinators was mostly demonstrated in highly specialized plant-pollinator systems, for example in orchids with one or few pollinators (Sun et al 2014; Newman et al 2012; Boberg et al 2014). Such specialized plants are rarely the target of large-scale restoration, because restoration mostly relies on common foundation species that tend to be generalists (Zelený & Chytrý 2019). Nevertheless, even provenances of these common species often vary in traits that may influence their interaction with pollinators, for example in flowering phenology (Bucharova, Michalski, et al 2017; Vander Mijnsbrugge et al 2015; Lyngdoh et al 2012; Díaz & Merlo 2008).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%