Soil nutritional factors improve models of plant species distribution: an illustration with Acer campestre (L.) in France

By Christophe Coudun, J. Gégout, C. Piedallu, J. Rameau. 2006

192 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecological Modeling, Nature and Landscape Conservation, Plant Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b6b66ff1b09ee67ec232dba9b3795322dcda665f

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. Wilfried Thuiller
2. Miguel B. Araújo
3. Antoine Guisan
4. Miska Luoto
5. Jorge M. Lobo
6. Jane Elith
7. Risto Heikkinen
8. Michael P. Austin

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

1. Miguel B. Araújo
2. Wilfried Thuiller
3. Antoine Guisan
4. Miska Luoto
5. Jorge M. Lobo
6. Risto Heikkinen
7. Jane Elith
8. Michael P. Austin

In Plant Science

1. Michael P. Austin
2. Wilfried Thuiller
3. Miguel B. Araújo
4. Anthony Lehmann
5. K. V. Van Niel
6. J. Dhote
7. J. Hervé
8. Antoine Guisan

Citations in the corpus

• Is the spatial distribution of European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) limited by its potential height growth? (2008, background): “These include microclimate (McKenzie et al., 2003) and soil characteristics (McKenzie et al., 2003; Pinto & Gégout, 2005; Russo et al., 2005; Coudun et al., 2006).”
• Climate warming and the decline of amphibians and reptiles in Europe (2006, background): “Non-climatic factors have been shown to be important for modelling distributions of other taxa (e.g. Coudun et al., 2006; Luoto et al., 2006) and their appropriate incorporation within models along with feed-back mechanisms among variables is likely to magnify estimates of decline or extinction of…”
• Improving generalized regression analysis for the spatial prediction of forest communities (2006, background): “Geology is an indirect parameter influencing the local distribution of vegetation; more direct predictors would have been soil pH, soil nutrients (Coudun et al., 2006), soil depth or particle size.”
• Five (or so) challenges for species distribution modelling (2006, background): “…this question requires quantifying how much climate can explain species distributions compared to other predictors, such as soils, site history, human influences, or other factors (e.g. Pearson et al., 2004; Thuiller et al., 2004a; del Barrio et al., 2006; Coudun et al., 2006; Luoto et al., 2006).”
• Determinants of the biogeographical distribution of butterflies in boreal regions (2006, background): “Such factors include, for example, spatial distribution of habitats, habitat management, nutritional factors and human disturbance (Hill et al., 1999; Dirnböck et al., 2003; Opdam & Wascher, 2004; Pearson et al., 2004; Stefanescu et al., 2004; Coudun et al., 2006).”
• Improving species distribution models for climate change studies: variable selection and scale (2011, methodology): “This is despite the ready availability of biophysical process models used to create variables representing light, providing proximal direct predictors for SDMs (Franklin, 1998; Leathwick, 1998; Coudon et al., 2006; Randin et al., 2006; Guisan et al., 2007).”