The ‘abundant centre’ distribution: to what extent is it a biogeographical rule?

By R. Sagarin, S. Gaines. 2002

730 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecological Modeling, Ecology, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8f3f4e034275ee252da052b96fc92b195d9e4354

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. Kevin J. Gaston
2. Steven L. Chown
3. J. Secondi
4. Yoan Fourcade
5. Brian J. McGill
6. A. Hampe
7. J. Engler
8. K. Evans

In Ecology

1. Kevin J. Gaston
2. Steven L. Chown
3. J. Secondi
4. Yoan Fourcade
5. K. Evans
6. Brian J. McGill
7. A. Mclachlan
8. Yun‐wei Dong

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

1. Kevin J. Gaston
2. Steven L. Chown
3. Brian J. McGill
4. K. Evans
5. A. Hampe
6. R. Petit
7. J. Secondi
8. Yoan Fourcade

Citations in the corpus

• Effects of marginality on plant population performance (2014, background): “We also reviewed papers dealing with plant species quoted in the reviews of Sagarin & Gaines (2002), Channell (2004), Eckert et al. (2008) and Sexton et al. (2009).”
• TetraDENSITY: A database of population density estimates in terrestrial vertebrates (2018, background): “…as species abundance distributions (McGill et al., 2007; Xiao, O’Dwyer, & White, 2015) and range size–abundance relationships (Gaston et al., 2000), in addition to large-scale intra- and interspecific geographical patterns in population density (e.g. Currie & Fritz, 1993; Sagarin & Gaines, 2002).”
• Genetic variation across species’ geographical ranges: the central–marginal hypothesis and beyond (2008, background): “…to as the ‘abundant centre’ model and has influenced much thinking Correspondence: C. G. Eckert, Fax: +1 613-533-6617; E-mail: chris.eckert@queensu.ca © 2008 The Authors Journal compilation © 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd about the ecology and evolution of species’ ranges (Sagarin & Gaines 2002).”
• Beyond long-term averages: making biological sense of a rapidly changing world (2014, background): “The perception that abundances are highest, and levels of stress lowest, in the middle of species ranges may not, therefore, be a safe assumption [84].”
• Is there a correlation between abundance and environmental suitability derived from ecological niche modelling? A meta‐analysis (2017, background): “Moving beyond assumptions creates an opportunity to bring new rigor to macroecology and offers new insights into fundamental ecological process (Sagarin et al. 2006) such as the AS relationship (analyzed here) and the abundant center hypothesis (Sagarin and Gaines 2002).”
• Patterns, processes and regulatory mechanisms in sandy beach macrofauna: a multi-scale analysis (2005, background): “Defeo & Cardoso (2004) suggested that the mole crab Emerita brasiliensis had a skewed, unimodal distribution pattern within its range, i.e. abundance did not vary smoothly from the central region to range boundaries (see Sagarin & Gaines 2002).”
• Conserving biodiversity under climate change: the rear edge matters. (2005, background): “Although the utility of this paradigm at local to regional scales is generally accepted, recent empirical work has challenged its significance at broad geographical scales (Channell & Lomolino 1999; Sagarin & Gaines 2002a,b; Vucetich & Waite 2003).”
• Harvestman (Arachnida: Opiliones) species distribution along three Neotropical elevational gradients: an alternative rescue effect to explain Rapoport's rule? (2006, methodology): “The specimen-based method gives a measure of central elevation that can detect more reliably if the species with broader elevational ranges are those from higher elevations ( Sagarin & Gaines, 2002 ), that is, species with greater abundances at higher elevations.”