Predicting crustacean zooplankton species richness

Dodson, Stanley I.

doi:10.4319/lo.1992.37.4.0848

Cited by 276 publications

(228 citation statements)

References 18 publications

(23 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

190

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Multiple regressions assessing the effect of two or more independent variables (transformed or not) on species numbers are also very common (e.g. Dodson, 1992;Adler & Lauenroth, 2003;Triantis et al, 2003;Adler et al, 2005;Storch et al, 2005;Kalmar & Currie, 2006, 2007Ulrich, 2006;Evans et al, 2007).…”

Section: Trivariate Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both models are sigmoid, but the Archibald model, owing to its inflection point falling at the origin of the axes, represents an alternative to convex models rather than other sigmoid models. normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) is probably the factor most regularly considered as a second predictor (see Wright, 1983;Dodson, 1992;Storch et al, 2005;Kalmar & Currie, 2006;Evans et al, 2007). A simple linear trivariate regression model is expressed as…”

Section: Trivariate Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Shapes and functions of species–area curves (II): a review of new models and parameterizations

Tjørve¹

2009

Journal of Biogeography

142

156

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper has extended and updated my earlier list and analysis of candidate models used in theoretical modelling and empirical examination of species–area relationships (SARs). I have also reviewed trivariate models that can be applied to include a second independent variable (in addition to area) and discussed extensively the justifications for fitting curves to SARs and the choice of model. There is also a summary of the characteristics of several new candidate models, especially extended power models, logarithmic models and parameterizations of the negative‐exponential family and the logistic family. I have, moreover, examined the characteristics and shapes of trivariate linear, logarithmic and power models, including combination variables and interaction terms. The choice of models according to best fit may conflict with problems of non‐normality or heteroscedasticity. The need to compare parameter estimates between data sets should also affect model choice. With few data points and large scatter, models with few parameters are often preferable. With narrow‐scale windows, even inflexible models such as the power model and the logarithmic model may produce good fits, whereas with wider‐scale windows where inflexible models do not fit well, more flexible models such as the second persistence (P2) model and the cumulative Weibull distribution may be preferable. When extrapolations and expected shapes are important, one should consider models with expected shapes, e.g. the power model for sample area curves and the P2 model for isolate curves. The choice of trivariate models poses special challenges, which one can more effectively evaluate by inspecting graphical plots.

show abstract

Section: Trivariate Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Trivariate Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shapes and functions of species–area curves (II): a review of new models and parameterizations

Tjørve¹

2009

Journal of Biogeography

142

156

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Larger aquatic habitats may have higher immigration 426 because they represent a larger target (Dodson, 1992) or there might be active selection, whereby 427 individuals select the larger habitat patches because this increases survival chances-a behaviour 428 observed in other aquatic invertebrates (Binckley and Resetarits, 2005) and also for Odonata in 429 bromeliads (Srivastava et al 2008). Also the exposure time to colonisation could play a role.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Aquatic invertebrate communities in tank bromeliads: how well do classic ecological patterns apply?

Jocqué

Field

2014

Hydrobiologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Jocque, Merlijn and Field, Richard (2014) A note on versions:The version presented here may differ from the published version or from the version of record. If you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the repository url above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription. We found that invertebrate species richness and abundance correlated most strongly, and 25 positively, with habitat size, which accounted for about a third of the variance in both. Apart from 26 bromeliad size (equivalent of the species-area relationship), we found remarkably little evidence 27 of classic biogeographic and ecological relationships with species richness in this system. 28Community composition correlated with altitude, bromeliad size and position, though less than 29 20% of the variation was accounted for by the tested variables. The turnover component of 30 dissimilarity between the communities correlated with altitude, while the nestedness-resultant 31 component was related to bromeliad size. The unexplained variance could reflect a large 32 stochastic component in the system, associated with the ephemerality of the habitat patches (both 33 the plants themselves and the fluctuations in their water content) and stochasticity due to the 34 dispersal dynamics in the system. 35We conclude that there is a small contribution of classic biogeographic factors to the 36 diversity and community composition of aquatic invertebrates communities in bromeliads. This 37 may be due to the highly dynamic nature of this system, with small patch sizes and high 38 emigration rates. The patterns may mostly be driven by factors affecting colonization success. 39 40

show abstract

“…Lake size also had a positive effect on ciliate ␣-diversity measures like species richness (Product-Moment correlation: r 2 = 0.083, p = 0.019) and Shannon Index (r 2 = 0.066, p = 0.038). Especially in anthropogenically influenced lakes (like the lakes in our study), species richness tends to increase with lake size, probably due to the higher spatial variability in larger lakes as was demonstrated for zooplankton, macrophytes, and fish (Dodson 1992;Hoffmann and Dodson 2005;Søndergaard et al 2005). Lake area might also influence ciliate diversity through differences in zooplankton community structure, since the relative contribution of cladocerans in our dataset tended to be smaller in the larger lakes (r 2 = 0.079, p = 0.022) and a negative association was found between the relative contribution of cladocerans and the ciliate species richness (r 2 = 0.065, p = 0.038) and Shannon Index (r 2 = 0.099, p = 0.010).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Planktonic ciliate community structure in shallow lakes of lowland Western Europe

Wichelen

Johansson

Vanormelingen

et al. 2013

European Journal of Protistology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution and sharing with colleagues.Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party websites are prohibited. AbstractTemperate shallow meso-to eutrophic lakes can exist in one of two alternative states with contrasting foodwebs, referred to as the clear-water and the turbid state. We describe the planktonic ciliate communities of such lakes based on a survey of 66 northwestern European lakes. Ciliates were enumerated and identified to species level according to the quantitative protargol staining technique. Ciliate biomass was on average twice as high in the turbid than in the clear-water lakes. The ciliate communities were dominated by oligotrichs and protostomatids, and no differences in functional composition or ␣-diversity could be detected between turbid and clear-water lakes, although ␤-diversity tended to be higher in the latter. At the species level, however, community structure strongly differed between turbid and clear-water lakes, and several indicator species could be identified for the different lake categories. Variation partitioning showed that nutrient status did not explain ciliate community structure independent of the alternative states, while lake area was identified as an additional structuring factor for the ciliate communities. These results stress the importance of the ecosystem structure in shaping ciliate communities in temperate shallow lakes and suggest that nutrient status has little direct effect on ciliate community structure in such lakes.

show abstract

Predicting crustacean zooplankton species richness

Cited by 276 publications

References 18 publications

Shapes and functions of species–area curves (II): a review of new models and parameterizations

Shapes and functions of species–area curves (II): a review of new models and parameterizations

Aquatic invertebrate communities in tank bromeliads: how well do classic ecological patterns apply?

Planktonic ciliate community structure in shallow lakes of lowland Western Europe

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About