2020
DOI: 10.1111/jvs.12885
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Is variable plot size a serious constraint in broad‐scale vegetation studies? A case study on fens

Abstract: QuestionFiltering vegetation plot records according to sampling size is an essential methodological step in vegetation studies. In fens, the variation of traditionally used plot sizes seems to limit continental‐scale syntheses following the Braun‐Blanquet approach. Which plot sizes harbour the analogous number of habitat specialists (i.e., diagnostic/indicator species) and capture the main compositional gradients identically?LocationScandinavia, central Europe.MethodsThe data set of fen vegetation plot records… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
10
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

4
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 88 publications
1
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As in Peterka et al (2017), we selected only georeferenced plots of a size of 1–100 m 2 , for which a complete list of moss and vascular plant taxa was reported. Peterka et al (2020) demonstrated that plot sizes of at least 1 m 2 sufficiently describe the broad‐scale pattern in the representation of fen specialists and may be safely merged in broad‐scale analyses with larger plots sizes, without introducing substantial bias. Restriction to a narrower plot size range would have resulted in a considerable loss of essential data from several regions.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As in Peterka et al (2017), we selected only georeferenced plots of a size of 1–100 m 2 , for which a complete list of moss and vascular plant taxa was reported. Peterka et al (2020) demonstrated that plot sizes of at least 1 m 2 sufficiently describe the broad‐scale pattern in the representation of fen specialists and may be safely merged in broad‐scale analyses with larger plots sizes, without introducing substantial bias. Restriction to a narrower plot size range would have resulted in a considerable loss of essential data from several regions.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The raw data set used for the analysis included 4,942 vegetation plots. Since it contained records from plots of variable size, which may affect the results (Otýpková and Chytrý, 2006; Dengler et al, 2009; but see Peterka et al, 2020), we removed plots of the size <4 m 2 or >200 m 2 . The plots with missing size information were preserved in the data set, assuming that most of them were within this range of plot sizes.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sample-size correction (only plots equal to or larger than 1 m 2 and equal to or smaller than 100 m 2 were kept; Peterka et al, 2020).…”
Section: Of 19mentioning
confidence: 99%