Unifying measures of biodiversity: understanding when richness and phylogenetic diversity should be congruent
By Caroline M. Tucker, Marc W. Cadotte. 2013
169 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Ecological Modeling, Nature and Landscape Conservation, Paleontology
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9b0cacabfac6f38b1475f72cad1cf468046d564d
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
- Caroline M. Tucker
- Marc W. Cadotte
- M. Winter
- T. Jonathan Davies
- S. Carvalho
- Matthew R. Helmus
- Simon Ferrier
- Sandrine Pavoine
In Nature and Landscape Conservation
- Caroline M. Tucker
- Marc W. Cadotte
- T. Jonathan Davies
- M. Winter
- S. Carvalho
- Matthew R. Helmus
- Simon Ferrier
- Sandrine Pavoine
In Paleontology
- Caroline M. Tucker
- Dan Rosauer
- Marc W. Cadotte
- T. Jonathan Davies
- Matthew R. Helmus
- Sandrine Pavoine
- Arne O. Mooers
- R. Grenyer
Citations in the corpus
- Difficult decisions: Strategies for conservation prioritization when taxonomic, phylogenetic and functional diversity are not spatially congruent (2018, background): “However, in practice these biodiversity measures can still vary in their relationship or be only weakly correlated for many reasons (Rodrigues et al., 2005; Tucker and Cadotte, 2013).”
- A guide to phylogenetic metrics for conservation, community ecology and macroecology (2016, background): “…to encourage the correct usage and interpretation of metrics (Faith, 2008; Schweiger et al., 2008; Pavoine, Love & Bonsall, 2009; Chao, Chiu & Jost, 2010, 2014; Pavoine & Bonsall, 2011; Swenson, 2011; Rosauer & Mooers, 2013; Tucker & Cadotte, 2013; Chiu et al., 2014; Pearse et al., 2014).”