The influence of spatial scale on quantifying insect dispersal: an analysis of butterfly data

By C. Schneider. 2003

133 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2a3218d16613cf2e55b1e24636de8540b98b6111

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

1. H. Van Dyck
2. M. Baguette
3. Josef Settele
4. C. Hassall
5. J. Dover
6. Michael Schaub
7. John J. Wiens
8. Peter J. Clark

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

1. H. Van Dyck
2. Josef Settele
3. J. Dover
4. M. Baguette
5. Michael Schaub
6. John J. Wiens
7. Peter J. Clark
8. David J. Thompson

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

1. H. Van Dyck
2. M. Baguette
3. Josef Settele
4. J. Dover
5. C. Hassall
6. W. Clark
7. Julia N. Auckland
8. D. Debinski

Citations in the corpus

• The effects of environmental warming on Odonata: a review (2008, background): “Indeed, there appears to be a correlation between the size of the area surveyed in these studies and the amount of dispersal recorded (Figure 2) like that found for butterfly dispersal studies (Schneider 2003).”
• The influences of landscape structure on butterfly distribution and movement: a review (2009, result): “stitutes isolation may, for some species, reflect the scale of our studies (Schneider 2003; Schmitt et al. 2006) rather”
• Movements of cactus bugs: Patch transfers, matrix resistance, and edge permeability (2004, background): “In mark-release-recapture studies, movement distances are often underestimated due to the restricted size of the study area Baker et al. 1995; Schneider 2003 .”
• Survival, movement, and resource use of the butterfly Parnassius clodius (2004, background): “Sampling effort and observed movement distance were correlated over the 3 years of the research (Table 2), providing further evidence that estimates of movement distance are biased by the distance over which sampling occurs (Porter & Dooley, 1993; Koenig et al., 2000; Schneider, 2003).”
• Dispersal behaviour in fragmented landscapes: Routine or special movements? (2005, background): “Schneider (2003) provides an interesting example of increasing dispersal estimates with increasing study area among studies on the same species.”
• Estimating true instead of apparent survival using spatial Cormack–Jolly–Seber models (2014, background): “This is often challenging because the observed dispersal movements are censored due to the limited size of the study area (Koenig, Van Vuren & Hooge 1996; Schneider 2003) and because a fraction of dispersal events within the study areamay remain undetected.”
• Measuring the dispersal of saproxylic insects: a key characteristic for their conservation (2006, unknown): “When an appropriate method and an appropriate spatial scale has been used, more dispersal is observed (Schneider 2003).”
• Effects of urbanization on butterfly species richness, guild structure, and rarity (2007, methodology): “Spatial scales were selected based on published butterfly dispersal distances from mark-release-recapture studies (Chew 1981; Schneider 2003).”