How Should Beta-Diversity Inform Biodiversity Conservation?

By Jacob B. Socolar, J. Gilroy, W. Kunin, D. Edwards. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 2016

1,271 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

A meta‐analysis of nestedness and turnover components of beta diversity across organisms and ecosystems (2018, background): “Such information about spatial variation in beta diversity is thus also prerequisite for testing general ecological theories (Baselga, 2010) and guiding practical management decisions (Socolar et al., 2016).”
Relationships between forest cover and fish diversity in the Amazon River floodplain (2018, background): “see Hewitt, Thrush, Halliday, and Duffy 2005 for benthic infauna and epifauna), with responses depending on taxonomic group, scale and region (Socolar et al., 2016).”
Species richness change across spatial scales (2019, background): “This can also be directly linked to the concept of diversity partitioning (γ-diversity=α-5 diversity∗β-diversity) and the influence of biotic homogenization and differentiation through time 6 (e.g., Crist and Veech 2006, Scheiner et al. 2011, Socolar et al. 2016).”
The Homogocene: a research prospectus for the study of biotic homogenisation (2018, background): “Taken together, despite the fact that alpha- and gamma-diversity have been the focus of local and regional conservation actions, the adoption of beta-diversity research and, by extension, the study of biotic homogenisation into conservation remains an emerging frontier (Socolar et al. 2016).”