Using species co-occurrence networks to assess the impacts of climate change
By Miguel B. Araújo, Alejandro Rozenfeld, C. Rahbek, Pablo A. Marquet. 2011
189 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/a13657ec32896102670fec5fbb36a52aaf342c52
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
- Jorge M. Lobo
- Miguel B. Araújo
- A. Townsend Peterson
- Jens‐Christian Svenning
- Wilfried Thuiller
- A. Jiménez‐Valverde
- Jorge Soberón
- Jane Elith
In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
- Paulo Roberto Guimaraes Jr.
- Dominique Gravel
- Jens‐Christian Svenning
- A. Townsend Peterson
- J. Veech
- Jorge M. Lobo
- A. Baselga
- F. Guillaume Blanchet
In Nature and Landscape Conservation
- Jorge M. Lobo
- Miguel B. Araújo
- A. Townsend Peterson
- Jens‐Christian Svenning
- Wilfried Thuiller
- Antoine Guisan
- A. Jiménez‐Valverde
- Dominique Gravel
Citations in the corpus
- The pairwise approach to analysing species co‐occurrence (2014, methodology): “Indeed, a recent study using network analysis showed that many species are only weakly linked to most other species in a network (Ara ujo et al., 2011).”
- Global patterns in the shape of species geographical ranges reveal range determinants (2012, background): “Such effects are often thought to be important mainly at the level of the fine structure of species distributions (Connor & Bowers, 1987), although they can also – at least theoretically – affect range limits (Case & Taper, 2000; Price & Kirkpatrick, 2009; Arau´jo et al. , 2011).”
- Co-occurrence is not evidence of ecological interactions. (2020, background): “…proposed a century ago (and some are actually very similar, e.g. Veech, 2013; Arita, 2016), but recent approaches are now focusing on the entire set of the significant co-occurrence associations, i.e. the co-occurrence network (Ara ujo et al., 2011; Tulloch et al., 2016; Kay et al., 2017).”
- Analysing ecological networks of species interactions (2018, background): “, 2011; Trøjelsgaard & Olesen, 2016), and their structure both locally and globally, is constrained by, but is also a constraint on, co-occurrence (Araújo et al., 2011; Cazelles et al., 2015).”
- Impacts of climate change on plant diseases—opinions and trends (2012, background): “…analysis of known occurrences of a plant pathogen in the plant trade and the semi-natural environment (Xu et al. 2009) to the use of network theory tools in targeting control and predicting climate change impacts (Araújo et al. 2011; Chadès et al. 2011; Moslonka-Lefebvre et al. 2011).”
- Uses and misuses of bioclimatic envelope modeling. (2012, methodology): “…(e.g., Araújo and Luoto 2007, Baselga and Araújo 2009, Meier et al. 2010) should be marshalled to constrain predictions of models when they are applied to forecasting distributional potential in different regions or under other sets of conditions (e.g., Dunn et al. 2009, Araújo et al. 2011b).”
- Inferring food web structure from predator–prey body size relationships (2013, background): “Contiguous gaps in the diet are likely to emerge from modularity in the co-occurrence matrix (Ara ujo et al. 2011).”