The World's Zoogeographical Regions Confirmed by Cross-Taxon Analyses

By Ş. Procheş, S. Ramdhani. 2012

132 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecological Modeling, Global and Planetary Change, Paleontology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/dd9e66e80506d2c841d6b63e68654985b2bdcfe5

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. J. Morrone
2. M. Rodríguez
3. B. Hawkins
4. Marta Rueda
5. M. Á. Olalla‐Tárraga
6. J. Diniz-Filho
7. Shai Meiri
8. Hong Qian

In Global and Planetary Change

1. M. Rodríguez
2. B. Hawkins
3. J. Morrone
4. M. Á. Olalla‐Tárraga
5. Shai Meiri
6. J. Diniz-Filho

In Paleontology

1. M. Rodríguez
2. J. Morrone
3. Marta Rueda
4. B. Hawkins
5. S. Nihei
6. I. Ferro
7. M. Pinna
8. F. Dagosta

Citations in the corpus

• Biogeographical regionalisation of the world: a reappraisal (2015, methodology): “It was treated as a region (Sclater 1858; Murray 1866; Kirby 1872; Wallace 1876; Sclater 1894; Bartholomew et al. 1911; de Mello-Leitão 1937; Darlington 1957; Pielou 1979, 1992; Müller 1986; Cox 2001; Procheş and Ramdhani 2012), a kingdom (Good 1947; Morain 1984; Müller 1986; Takhtajan 1986; Udvardy”
• Identifying global zoogeographical regions: lessons from Wallace (2013, background): “Proches & Ramdhani (2012) used generic-level distributions but ecoregions as the geographical units, which are somewhat coarse and ensure that the outcome will include ecological (vegetation types) effects.”
• The spectre of biogeographical regionalization (2018, methodology): “Although some authors refer occasionally to ‘phytogeographic’ and ‘zoogeographic’ regionalizations (e.g. Cox, 2001), the ultimate goal should be to integrate all taxonomic distributions in a single biogeographical system (Morrone, 2002; Proches & Ramdhani, 2012).”