2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.baae.2008.01.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Spatial (a)synchrony in population fluctuations of five plant species in fragmented habitats

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, the smallest measurable P value is 1/(9,999 ? 1) (Fortin et al 2002, Fortin and Dale 2005, Kiviniemi and Löfgren 2009.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Therefore, the smallest measurable P value is 1/(9,999 ? 1) (Fortin et al 2002, Fortin and Dale 2005, Kiviniemi and Löfgren 2009.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…As eggs were counted on only 10 fruits per tree per collection date, egg abundances and egg infestation rates were not considered for spatial analysis because values per tree were too small. The Mantel statistic estimates the linear correlation (Pearson's product-moment) between the distance values of two paired symmetric matrices, and repeated permutations (randomisation procedure) give its significance (Legendre and Fortin 1989;Legendre and Legendre 1998;Fortin and Dale 2005;Kiviniemi and Löfgren 2009). As the precision of the probability value is directly related to the number of randomisations, we used 9,999 permutations plus the observed statistic.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Bjørnstad et al, 1999) and separating dispersal from these effects is notoriously problematic (Kendall et al, 2000; Kiviniemi and Löfgren, 2009). National climate trends were addressed by conducting analyses on pre-whitened data and at a local scale, where movement of individuals has a greater effect than climate .…”
Section: Synchrony Data Availabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite the ubiquity of autocorrelation in ecological systems, the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. Three commonly cited mechanisms hypothesized to cause spatial synchrony are: (a) correlated environmental conditions that drive population dynamics [Moran effects;Moran 1953;Ranta et al 1997], (b) dispersal or movement between populations, and (c) interspecific interactions such as predator/prey relationships (Koenig 2002;Liebhold et al 2004;Kiviniemi and Lofgren 2009;Rosenstock et al 2011). Any of these mechanisms may produce a pattern of declining synchrony with increasing distance (Bellamy et al 2003).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…not in synchrony) with possibility of recolonization should they become locally extinct (Hanski and Gilpin 1991;Koenig 1998). Indeed metapopulation structure is known to reduce risk of extinction in fragmented landscapes across a wide range of taxa including plants (Kiviniemi and Lofgren 2009), invertebrates (Hanski et al 1995;Drechsler et al 2003;Guiney et al 2010;Harrison et al 1988), fish (Smedbol and Wroblewski 2002;Figueira 2009), herptiles (Marsh and Trenham 2001;Hels and Nachman 2002;Templeton et al 2011), mammals (Sweanor et al 2000;Magle et al 2010), and birds (Busch et al 2000;Cattadori et al 1999;Scheiman et al 2007;Ringsby et al 2002). Metapopulations within urbanizing landscapes remain largely unexamined (Niemelä 1999), despite the fact that reproductive rates, population turnover, and landscape permeability are strongly affected by urban land uses (Hanski and Gilpin 1991;Opdam 1991;Soule et al 1988, Reed andLevine 2005).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%