Climate‐based models of spatial patterns of species richness in Egypt’s butterfly and mammal fauna

By Tim Newbold, Francis Gilbert, S. Zalat, Ahmed El‐Gabbas, Tom Reader. 2009

87 citations recorded by the source corpus.

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

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6a6f8e02f130ddca12b8a18e74b5f29b06dc1099

How researchers see this paper

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

In Ecological Modeling

1. Loïc Pellissier
2. J. Pottier
3. Anne Dubuis
4. Antoine Guisan
5. Tim Newbold
6. Luis Cayuela
7. J. Theurillat
8. Fábio Suzart de Albuquerque

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

1. Antoine Guisan
2. Loïc Pellissier
3. Luis Cayuela
4. J. Pottier
5. Anne Dubuis
6. Tim Newbold
7. C. Nilsson
8. Roland Jansson

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

1. Antoine Guisan
2. Loïc Pellissier
3. J. Pottier
4. Anne Dubuis
5. J. Theurillat
6. Vanessa Rion
7. Luis Cayuela
8. Tim Newbold

Citations in the corpus

• Applications and limitations of museum data for conservation and ecology, with particular attention to species distribution models (2010, methodology): “A quantitative analysis of the same data showed that records were distributed almost as evenly along the main environmental gradients as would be expected if the sites had been located randomly (Newbold et al., 2009).”
• The impact of modelling choices in the predictive performance of richness maps derived from species‐distribution models: guidelines to build better diversity models (2013, background): “Consequently, a significant level of overprediction error in species richness should be expected (Gioia & Pigott 2000; Algar et al. 2009; Newbold et al. 2009; Dubuis et al. 2011; Mateo et al. 2012; but see Lehmann, Leathwick & Overton 2002).”
• Predicting spatial patterns of plant species richness: a comparison of direct macroecological and species stacking modelling approaches (2011, background): “Algar et al. (2009) and Newbold et al. (2009) also reported the same trend (although in Algar, only for the MEM without a spatial autocorrelation term, as no spatial autocorrelation was included in their S-SDMs).”
• The usefulness of elevation as a predictor variable in species distribution modelling (2012, background): “In addition, both habitat and elevation can restrict species ranges (Harris and Pimm, 2008; Sekercioglu and Schneider, 2008), and have shown to be important in explaining the distribution of species (Luoto and Heikkinen, 2008; Newbold et al., 2009; Virkkala et al., 2010).”