Should we use proportional sampling for species–area studies?
By J. Schoereder, C. Galbiati, C. Ribas, T. Sobrinho, Carlos Frankl Sperber, O. DeSouza, C. Lopes‐Andrade. 2004
120 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Genetics, Nature and Landscape Conservation
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/30237c75a612711058ea30eb6f7aabccfad28d82
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
In Genetics
In Nature and Landscape Conservation
- V. Arroyo‐Rodríguez
- L. Vicente
- Mingjian Yu
- Adriana Garmendia
- Henrique M. Pereira
- E. Naranjo
- V. Proença
- P. Ding
Citations in the corpus
- BIODIVERSITY RESEARCH: Nestedness for different reasons: the distributions of birds, lizards and small mammals on islands of an inundated lake (2010, background): “To account for the greater habitat variability associated with larger sites, sampling effort was roughly proportional to island area (log10-transformed) (Schoereder et al., 2004).”
- Landscape and patch attributes impacting medium- and large-sized terrestrial mammals in a fragmented rain forest (2013, methodology): “In each analysis we included distance walked in each site as a cofactor to control for differences among sites in sample size (Schoereder et al. 2004).”
- Plant and bird diversity in natural forests and in native and exotic plantations in NW Portugal (2010, background): “Using a proportional sampling effort reduces the probability of missing a given habitat (or habitat feature) inside a patch as the area increases, therefore reducing the probability of missing species that use that habitat (Schoereder et al., 2004).”