TURBOVEG, a comprehensive data base management system for vegetation data
By Stephan Hennekens, J. Schaminée. 2001
1,065 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Insect Science, Nature and Landscape Conservation, Plant Science
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b4bc8992f0683ebe9c393743eddee024e33a166f
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Insect Science
In Nature and Landscape Conservation
In Plant Science
Citations in the corpus
- Pladias Database of the Czech flora and vegetation (2021, methodology): “The plot data are kept separately in the Czech National Phytosociological Database (Chytrý & Rafajová 2003) managed using the Turboveg program (Hennekens & Schaminée 2001), which is specifically tailored for this data type and enables international data sharing (Chytrý et al. 2016, Bruelheide et…”
- Niche characteristics of Danish woody species as derived from coenoclines (2002, methodology): “…published surveys, complemented with unpublished samples from the first author, were compiled with the database program TURBOVEG (Hennekens 1996; Hennekens & Schaminée 2001), to create 1 data set that contained 2300 vegetation samples (with sample areas varying from 4 to 400 m2) and 618 plant…”
- Patterns of plant traits in annual vegetation of man-made habitats in central Europe (2006, background): “Recent compilations of large databases of vegetation plot samples (‘phytosociological relevés’) (Ewald, 2001; Hennekens and Schaminée, 2001) and plant traits (e.g. Klotz et al., 2002) have facilitated analyses of plant trait patterns across different habitats (Ozinga et al., 2004b).”
- Phytosociology today: Methodological and conceptual evolution (2011, background): “The vast amount of vegetational data now available and the recent creation of numerous programs dedicated to the processing of phytosociological tables (Orloci 1978 ; Feoli & Lagonegro 1982 ; Feoli 1984 ; Podani 2000 , 2001 , 2005 ), together with the setting up of huge databases (Turboveg in ”
- Plant names in vegetation databases – a neglected source of bias (2010, methodology): “Widely used vegetation database programs such as TURBOVEG (Hennekens & Schaminée 2001) do not provide a field for the entry of information on the preciseness of plant identification as default.”
- Local and regional patterns of species richness in Central European vegetation types along the pH/calcium gradient (2003, methodology): “Making use of large phytosociological databases (EWALD 2001, HENNEKENS & SCHAMINÉE 2001) is an attractive option for analyzing local species richness and species pools over wide ranges of habitats and large areas.”
- A critique for phytosociology (2003, background): “The provision of a worldwide pool of plot data through electronic databanks (Hennekens & Schaminée 2001; Ewald 2001) has the potential of stimulating all kinds of meta-analyses, ranging from classical synthetic classifications to predictive mapping (Brzeziecki et al. 1993) and tests of hypotheses…”
- Czech National Phytosociological Database: basic statistics ofthe available vegetation-plot data (2003, background): “Since the mid 1990s, this was facilitated by the wide availability of Turboveg database management software (Hennekens & Schaminée 2001; see also www.synbiosys.alterra.nl/turboveg/).”
- Are all urban green spaces a favourable habitat for pollinator communities? Bees, butterflies and hoverflies in different urban green areas (2019, methodology): “All collected data were entered into the Turboveg program (Hennekens & Schaminée, 2001).”
- How important is long‐distance seed dispersal for the regional survival of plant species? (2005, methodology): “For this, we obtained data from the Dutch Vegetation Database, comprising > 35,000 descriptions of species composition in small plots (relevés) throughout the Netherlands from 1930– 1999 (Hennekens & Schaminée, 2001).”