Measuring Plant Diversity: Lessons from the Field

By Thomas J. Stohlgren. 2006

141 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Nature and Landscape Conservation, Plant Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/40500024371b39ae0eee0b770d10b3b38bf99f0b

How researchers see this paper

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

In Ecology

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

In Plant Science

Citations in the corpus

A flexible multi-scale approach for standardised recording of plant species richness patterns (2009, background): “For a given plot size, species richness depends on the shape of the plot, and normally increases with decreasing compactness (Kunin, 1997; Dengler, 2003, 2008; Stohlgren, 2007).”
Widespread plant species: natives versus aliens in our changing world (2011, background): “The initial cutoff point of 120 species was arbitrary, but based largely upon our general knowledge of plant frequency distributions (Stohlgren 2007, p. 7), where plant frequency distributions level off to low numbers of occurrences.”
Quantifying plant species diversity in a Natura 2000 network: Old ideas and new proposals (2008, background): “This is particularly true for plants, for which methods are available for assessing species diversity at a local scale (see e.g. Stohlgren, 2007), but not at a larger scale, such as a large protected area or a whole network of protected areas.”
Using district-level occurrences in MaxEnt for predicting the invasion potential of an exotic insect pest in India (2014, background): “The predicted map can also serve as a testable alternative hypothesis for P. solenopsis occurrence in non-infested districts.”
Accounting for uncertainty when mapping species distributions: The need for maps of ignorance (2011, background): “…shifts from year to year (thus being temporarily absent when the surveys are carried out), may be missed simply because the habitat or site in question has not been accurately sampled (Gu and Swihart, 2004; Lobo et al., 2007; Stohlgren, 2007), or may have been misidentified (Berendsohn, 1995).”