THE SCALE OF COMMUNITY STRUCTURE: HABITAT VARIATION AND AVIAN GUILDS IN TROPICAL FOREST UNDERSTORY

By P. Pearman. 2002

195 citations recorded by the source corpus.

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

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/75900cb116106b359d1c8e0d5df826d4288568c4

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 Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

Bird's Response to Revegetation of Different Structure and Floristics—Are “Restoration Plantings” Restoring Bird Communities? (2011, methodology): “Our choice of a 2.25- km radius was informed by the approximate scale at which we believed birds may respond to woody vegetation cover (e.g. Villard et al. 1999; Pearman 2002; Radford et al. 2005).”
Managing ecosystem services: what do we need to know about their ecology? (2005, background): “…to obtain, particularly for multiple species within a guild, other methods may be necessary, including determining the scale of the best model (Pearman 2002), matching the scale at which the organism perceives its environment to the scale of the landscape (Brooks 2003) or conducting…”
Relative effects of fragment size and connectivity on bird community in the Atlantic Rain Forest: Implications for conservation (2008, background): “Mist-nets were used mainly because of their suitability for comparisons, since they are less influenced by observer-bias, they minimize identification errors, and they allow marking individuals for detection of movements through recaptures (Karr, 1981; Pearman, 2002).”
A hierarchical classification of trophic guilds for North American birds and mammals (2014, background): “…used in a large number of studies of birds, and they may involve a great number of species and several guilds (e. g., Cody, 1983; Case et al., 1983; Pearman, 2002; Adamík et al., 2003; Korňan et al., 2013), but only one work has attempted to provide a guild classification for a great number of…”
The area requirements of an ecosystem service: crop pollination by native bee communities in California (2004, background): “…the areas designated for this important function have not been determined from ecological knowledge but ad hoc (P. Jaffe, Princeton University, personal communication); the per capita watershed areas protected for this function vary over three orders of magnitude for different cities (Reid 2001).”
Species richness and community composition of songbirds in a tropical forest‐agricultural landscape (2004, background): “The landscape context of avian sampling sites may be an important influence on local community structure (Lichstein et al., 2002; Pearman, 2002).”
PCA – A Powerful Method for Analyze Ecological Niches (2012, background): “…et al., 2010a; Faucon et al., 2011; Grenouillet et al., 2011), the investigated species or community characteristics (e.g., Kingston et al., 2000; Pearman 2002; Youlatos 2004; Kitahara & Fujii 2005), or both, sometimes in combination with detrended correspondence analysis, DCA, canonical…”
Ecologically Unequal Exchange, World Polity, and Biodiversity Loss (2009, background): “The Red List, a comprehensive inventory of threatened species, is the most widely used source on endangered animals (Cole et al., 1994; Hoffmann, 2004; Pearman, 2002).”
A spatial scale assessment of habitat effects on arthropod communities of an oceanic island (2009, methodology): “The spatial scale dependence of species richness or abundance can be analysed using a multiple scale approach (Pearman, 2002).”