[Aas, B. & Faarlund, T. 2000. Forest limits and the subalpine birch belt in north Europe with a
focus on Norway. – AmS-Varia 37: 103-147.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Aasetre, J. & Bele, B. 2009. History of forestry in a central Norwegian boreal forest landscape:
examples from Nordli, Nord-Trøndelag. – Norsk geogr. Tidsskr. 63: 233-245.]Search in Google Scholar
[Aerts, R., Cornelissen, J.H.C. & Dorrepaal, E. 2006. Plant performance in a warmer world: general
responses of plants from cold, northern biomes and the importance of winter and spring
events. – Pl. Ecol. 182: 65-77.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Ahti, T., Hämet-Ahti, L. & Jalas, J. 1968. Vegetation zones and their sections in northwestern
Europe. – Annls bot. fenn. 5: 169-211.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Alexander, H.M., Price, S., Houser, R., Finch, D. & Tourtellot, M. 2007. Is there reduction in disease
and pre-dispersal seed predation at the border of a host plant’s range? Field and
herbarium studies of Carex blanda. – J. Ecol. 95: 446-457.
10.1111/j.1365-2745.2007.01228.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Allen, T.F.H. & Hoekstra, T.W. 1990. The confusion between scale-defined levels and conventional
levels of organization in ecology. – J. Veg. Sci. 1: 5-12.
10.2307/3236048]Search in Google Scholar
[Allen, T.F.H. & Starr, T.B. 1982. Hierarchy: perspectives for ecological complexity. – University
of Chicago Press, Chigago.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Almås, R., Gjerdåker, B., Lunden, K., Myhre, B. & Øye, I. 2004. Norwegian agricultural history. –
Tapir, Trondheim.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Alsos, I.G., Eidesen, P.B., Ehrich, D., Skrede, I., Westergaard, K., Jacobsen, G.H., Landvik, J.Y., Taberlet,
P. & Brochmann, C. 2007. Frequent long-distance plant colonization in the changing
Arctic. – Science 316: 1606-1609.
10.1126/science.113917817569861]Search in Google Scholar
[Anderson, K., Bennie, J. & Wetherelt, A. 2010. Laser scanning of fine scale pattern along a hydrological
gradient in a peatland ecosystem. – Landsc. Ecol. 25: 477-492.
10.1007/s10980-009-9408-y]Search in Google Scholar
[Anderson, M.J. & Gribble, N.A. 1998. Partitioning the variation among spatial, temporal and
environmental components in a multivariate data set. – Aust. J. Ecol. 23: 158-167.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Anderson, R.P. 2003. Real vs. artefactual ansences in species distributions: tests for Oryzomus
albigularis (Rodentia: Muridae) in Venezuela. – J. Biogeogr. 30: 591-605.
10.1046/j.1365-2699.2003.00867.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Anderson, R.P. & Gonzalez, I.J. 2011. Species-specific tuning increases robustness to sampling
bias in models of species distributions: an implementation with Maxent. – Ecol. Modelling
222: 2796-2811.
10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.04.011]Search in Google Scholar
[Anderson, R.P. & Raza, A. 2010. The effect of the extent of the study region on GIS models of
species geographic distributions and estimates of niche evolution: preliminary tests with
montane rodents (genus Nephelomys) in Venezuela. – J. Biogeogr. 37: 1378-1393.
10.1111/j.1365-2699.2010.02290.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Anonymous (ed.) 1984. Terrängformer i Norden. – Nordiska Ministerrådet, Arlöv.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Aranda, S.C. & Lobo, J.M. 2011. How well does presence-only-based species distribution modelling predict assemblage diversity? A case study of the Tenerife flora. – Ecography 34: 31-38.
10.1111/j.1600-0587.2010.06134.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Araújo, M.B. & Guisan, A. 2006. Five (or so) challenges for species distribution modelling. – J.
Biogeogr. 33: 1677-1688.
10.1111/j.1365-2699.2006.01584.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Araújo, M.B. & Luoto, M. 2007. The importance of biotic interactions for modelling species
distributions under climate change. – Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 16: 743-753.
10.1111/j.1466-8238.2007.00359.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Araújo, M.B., Pearson, R.G., Thuiller, W. & Erhard, M. 2005. Validation of species-climate impact
models under climate change. – Global Change Biol. 11: 1504-1513.
10.1111/j.1365-2486.2005.01000.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Arnesen, G., Beck, P.S.A. & Engelskjøn, T. 2007. Soil acidity, content of carbonates, and available
phosphorus are the soil factors best correlated with alpine vegetation: evidence from
Troms, North Norway. – Arct. antarct. alp. Res. 39: 189-199.
10.1657/1523-0430(2007)39[189:SACOCA]2.0.CO;2]Search in Google Scholar
[Arnesen, T. 1999. Vegetation dynamics following trampling in grassland and heathland in Sølendet
Nature Reserve, a boreal upland area in Central Norway. – Nord. J. Bot. 19: 47-69.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Arrhenius, O. 1921. Species and area. – J. Ecol. 9: 95-99.
10.2307/2255763]Search in Google Scholar
[Auestad, I., Halvorsen, R., Bakkestuen, V. & Erikstad, L. 2011. Utbredelsesmodellering av fremmede
invaderende karplanter langs veg. – Dir. Naturforv. Utredn. 2011: 2: 1-30.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Aune, B. 1993. Temperaturnormaler, normalperiode 1961-1990. – Norske meteorol. Inst. Rapp.
Klima 1993: 2: 1-63.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, M. 2007. Species distribution models and ecological theory: a critical assessment and
some possible new approaches. – Ecol. Modelling 200: 1-19.
10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.07.005]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, M.P. 1976. On non-linear species response models in ordination. – Vegetatio 33: 33-
41.
10.1007/BF00055297]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, M.P. 1980. Searching for a model for use in vegetation analysis. – Vegetatio 42: 11-21.
10.1007/BF00048865]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, M.P. 1981. Permanent quadrats: an interface for theory and practice. – Vegetatio 46-47:
1-10.
10.1007/BF00118379]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, M.P. 1986. The theoretical basis of vegetation science. – Trends Ecol. Evol. 1: 161-164.
10.1016/0169-5347(86)90045-5]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, M.P. 1987. Models for analysis of species’ response to environmental gradients. – Vegetatio
69: 35-45.
10.1007/978-94-009-4061-1_4]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, M.P. 1990. Community theory and competition in vegetation. – In: Grace, J.B. & Tilman,
D. (ed.), Perspectives on plant competition, Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 215-238.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, M.P. 1999a. The potential contribution of vegetation ecology to biodiversity research.
– Ecography 22: 465-484.
10.1111/j.1600-0587.1999.tb01276.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, M.P. 1999b. A silent clash of paradigms: some inconsistencies in community ecology. –
Oikos 86: 170-178.
10.2307/3546582]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, M.P. 2002. Spatial prediction of species distribution: an interface between ecological
theory and statistical modelling. – Ecol. Modelling 157: 101-118.
10.1016/S0304-3800(02)00205-3]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, M.P. 2005. Vegetation and environment: discontinuities and continuities. – In: van der
Maarel, E. (ed.), Vegetation ecology, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 52-84.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, M.P., Belbin, L., Meyers, J.A., Doherty, M.D. & Luoto, M. 2006. Evaluation of statistical
models used for predicting plant species distributions: role of artificial data and theory.
– Ecol. Modelling 199: 197-216.
10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.05.023]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, M.P., Cunningham, R.B. & Fleming, P.M. 1984. New approaches to direct gradient analysis
using environmental scalars and statistical curve-fitting procedures. – Vegetatio 55:
11-27.
10.1007/BF00039976]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, M.P. & Gaywood, M.J. 1994. Current problems of environmental gradients and species
response curves in relation to continuum theory. – J. Veg. Sci. 5: 473-482.
10.2307/3235973]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, M.P. & Heyligers, P.C. 1989. Vegetation survey design for conservation: gradsect sampling
of forests in north-eastern New South Wales. – Biol. Conserv. 50: 13-32.
10.1016/0006-3207(89)90003-7]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, M.P. & Meyers, J.A. 1996. Current approaches to modelling the environmental niche of
eucalypts: implication for management of forest biodiversity. – For. Ecol. Mgmt 85: 95-106.
10.1016/S0378-1127(96)03753-X]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, M.P. & Nicholls, A.O. 1997. To fix or not fix the species limits, that is the ecological question:
response to Jari Oksanen. – J. Veg. Sci. 8: 743-748.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, M.P., Nicholls, A.O., Doherty, M.D. & Meyers, J.A. 1994. Determining species response functions
to an environmental gradient by means of a β-function. – J. Veg. Sci. 5: 215-228.
10.2307/3236154]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, M.P. & Smith, T.M. 1989. A new model for the continuum concept. – Vegetatio 83: 35-
47.
10.1007/BF00031679]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, M.P. & van Niel, K.P. 2011a. Improving species distribution models for climate change
studies: variable selection and scale. – J. Biogeogr. 38: 1-8.
10.1111/j.1365-2699.2010.02416.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, M.P. & van Niel, K.P. 2011b. Impact of landscape predictors on climate change modelling
of species distributions: a case study with Eucalyptus fastigata in southern New South
Wales, Australia. – J. Biogeogr. 38: 9-19.
10.1111/j.1365-2699.2010.02415.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Baadsvik, K. 1974. Phytosociological and ecological investigations in an alpine area at Lake
Kamtjern, Trollheimen Mts, Central Norway. – K. norske Vidensk. Selsk. Skr. 1974: 5:
1-61.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Bahn, V. & McGill, B.J. 2007. Can niche-based distribution models outperform spatial interpolation?
– Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 16: 733-742.
10.1111/j.1466-8238.2007.00331.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Bakkestuen, V., Erikstad, L. & Halvorsen, R. 2008. Step-less models for regional environmental
variation in Norway. – J. Biogeogr. 35: 1906-1922.
10.1111/j.1365-2699.2008.01941.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Bakkestuen, V., Halvorsen, R. & Heegaard, E. 2009. Disentangling complex fine-scale ecological
patterns by path modelling using GLMM and GIS. – J. Veg. Sci. 20: 779-790.
10.1111/j.1654-1103.2009.01001.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Bannister, P. 1964. The water relations of certain heath plants with reference to their ecological
amplitude. III. Experimental studies: general conclusions. – J. Ecol. 52: 499-509.
10.2307/2257846]Search in Google Scholar
[Barry, S. & Elith, J. 2006. Error and uncertainty in habitat models. – J. appl. Ecol. 43: 413-423.
10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01136.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Bartel, R.A. & Sexton, J.O. 2009. Monitoring habitat dynamics for rare and endangered species
using satellite images and niche-based models. – Ecography 32: 888-896.
10.1111/j.1600-0587.2009.05797.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Barve, N., Barve, V., Jiménez-Valverde, A., Lira-Noriega, A., Maher, S.P., Peterson, A.T., Soberón, J.
& Villalobos, F. 2011. The crucial role of the accessible area in ecological niche modeling
and species distribution modeling. – Ecol. Modelling 222: 1810-1819.
10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.02.011]Search in Google Scholar
[Baselga, A. & Araújo, M.B. 2009. Individualistic vs community modelling of species distributions
under climate change. – Ecography 32: 55-65.
10.1111/j.1600-0587.2009.05856.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Beaumont, L.J., Gallacher, R.V., Thuiller, W., Downer, P.O., Leishman, M.R. & Hughes, L. 2009. Different
climatic envelopes among invasive populations may lead to underestimations of
current and future biological invasions. – Divers. Distrib. 15: 409-420.
10.1111/j.1472-4642.2008.00547.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Bendiksen, E., Økland, R.H., Høiland, K., Eilertsen, O. & Bakkestuen, V. 2004. Relationships between
macrofungi, plants and environmental factors in boreal coniferous forests in the
Solhomfjell area, Gjerstad, S Norway. – Sommerfeltia 30: 1-125.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Berglund, H. & Jonsson, B.-G. 2001. Predictability of plant and fungal species richness of oldgrowth
boreal forest islands. – J. Veg. Sci. 12: 857-866.
10.2307/3236874]Search in Google Scholar
[Berglund, H. & Jonsson, B.G. 2005. Verifying an extinction debt among lichens and fungi in
northern Swedish boreal forests. – Conserv. Biol. 19: 338-348.
10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00550.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Bierzychudek, P. 1999. Looking backwards: assessing the projections of a transition matrix
model. – Ecol. Appl. 9: 1278-1287.
10.1890/1051-0761(1999)009[1278:LBATPO]2.0.CO;2]Search in Google Scholar
[Birks, H.H. 2008. The late-quaternary history of arctic and alpine plants. – Pl. Ecol. Div. 1:
135–146.
10.1080/17550870802328652]Search in Google Scholar
[Birks, H.J.B. & Birks, H.H. 2008. Biological responses to rapid climate change at the Younger
Dryas Holocene transition at Kråkenes, western Norway. – Holocene 18: 19–30.
10.1177/0959683607085572]Search in Google Scholar
[Birks, H.J.B. 1993a. Is the hypothesis of survival of glacial nunataks necessary to explain the
present-day distributions of Norwegian mountain plants? – Phytocoenologia 23: 399-426.
10.1127/phyto/23/1993/399]Search in Google Scholar
[Birks, H.J.B. 1993b. Quaternary palaeoecology and vegetation science - current contributions
and possible future developments. – Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol. 79: 153-177.
10.1016/0034-6667(93)90045-V]Search in Google Scholar
[Blaalid, R., Carlsen, T., Kumar, S., Halvorsen, R., Ugland, K.I., Fontana, G. & Kauserud, H. 2012.
Changes in the root-associated fungal communities along a primary succession gradient
analysed by 454 pyrosequencing. – Molec. Ecol. in press.
10.1111/j.1365-294X.2011.05214.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Bobbink, R., Hicks, K., Galloway, J., Spranger, T., Alkemade, R., Ashmore, M., Bustamante, M.,
Cinderby, S., Davidson, E., Dentener, F., Emmett, B., Erisman, J.-W., Fenn, M., Gilliam, F.,
Nordin, A., Pardo, L. & de Vries, W. 2010. Global assessment of nitrogen deposition effects
on terrestrial plant diversity: a synthesis. – Ecol. Appl. 20: 30-59.
10.1890/08-1140.1]Search in Google Scholar
[Bobbink, R., Hornung, M. & Roelofs, J.G.M. 1998. The effects of air-borne nitrogen pollutants on
species diversity and semi-natural European vegetation. – J. Ecol. 86: 717-738.
10.1046/j.1365-2745.1998.8650717.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Bombi, P. & D’Amen, M. 2012. Scaling down distribution maps from atlas data: a test of different
approaches with virtual species. – J. Biogeogr. 39: 640-651.
10.1111/j.1365-2699.2011.02627.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Bombi, P., Luiselli, L. & D’Amen, M. 2011. When the method for mapping species matters: defining
priority areas for conservation of African freshwater turtles. – Divers. Distrib. 17:
581-592.
10.1111/j.1472-4642.2011.00769.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Borcard, D., Legendre, P. & Drapeau, P. 1992. Partialling out the spatial component of ecological
variation. – Ecology 73: 1045-1055.
10.2307/1940179]Search in Google Scholar
[Boyko, H. 1947. On the role of plants as quantitative climate indicators and the geo-ecological
law of distribution. – J. Ecol. 35: 138-157.
10.2307/2256504]Search in Google Scholar
[Bradley, B.A. & Fleishman, E. 2008. Can remote sensing of land cover improve species distribution
modelling? – J. Biogeogr. 35: 1158-1159.
10.1111/j.1365-2699.2008.01928.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Bratli, H., Økland, T., Økland, R.H., Dramstad, W.E., Elven, R., Engan, G., Fjellstad, W., Heegaard,
E., Pedersen, O. & Solstad, H. 2006. Patterns of variation in vascular plant species richness
and composition in SE Norwegian agricultural landscapes. – Agric. Ecosyst. Environm.
114: 270-286.
10.1016/j.agee.2005.10.022]Search in Google Scholar
[Braun-Blanquet, J. 1928. Pflanzensoziologie. Gründzuge der Vegetationskunde. – Springer,
Berlin.
10.1007/978-3-662-02056-2]Search in Google Scholar
[Braunisch, V. & Suchant, R. 2010. Predicting species distributions based on incomplete survey
data: the trade-off between precision and scale. – Ecography 33: 826-840.
10.1111/j.1600-0587.2009.05891.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Brochmann, C., Gabrielsen, T.M., Nordal, I., Landvik, J.M. & Elven, R. 2003. Glacial survival or
tabula rasa? The history of North Atlantic biota revisited. – Taxon 52: 417-450.
10.2307/3647381]Search in Google Scholar
[Brown, J.H. 1984. On the relationship between abundance and distribution of species. – Am.
Nat. 124: 255-279.
10.1086/284267]Search in Google Scholar
[Brown, J.H., Stevens, G.C. & Kaufman, D.M. 1996. The geographical range: size, shape, boundaries,
and internal structure. – A. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 27: 597-623.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Bryn, A. 2006. Vegetation mapping in Norway and a scenario for vegetation changes in a mountain
district. – Geogr. pol. 79: 42-64.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Bryn, A., Dourojeanni, P., Hemsing, L.Ø. & O’Donnell, S. 2012. A high-resolution GIS null model
of potential forest expansion following land use changes in Norway. – Scand. J. For. Res.
28: in press.
10.1080/02827581.2012.689005]Search in Google Scholar
[Buckley, H.L. & Freckleton, R.P. 2010. Understanding the role of species dynamics in abundance–
occupancy relationships. – J. Ecol. 98: 645-658.
10.1111/j.1365-2745.2010.01650.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Buhk, C., Retzer, V., Beierkuhnlein, C. & Jentsch, A. 2007. Predicting plant species richness and
vegetation patterns in cultural landscapes using disturbance parameters. – Agric. Ecosyst.
Environm. 122: 446-452.
10.1016/j.agee.2007.02.010]Search in Google Scholar
[Burger, A. & Page, R. 2007. The need for biological realism in habitat modeling: a reinterpretation
of Zharikov et al. (2006). – Landsc. Ecol. 22: 1273-1281.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Burkholder, P.R. 1952. Cooperation and conflict among primitive organisms. – Am. Scient. 40:
601-631.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Burns, K.C. 2007. Patterns in the assembly of an island plant community. – J. Biogeogr. 34: 760-
768.
10.1111/j.1365-2699.2006.01625.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Burrough, P.A. & McDonnell, R.A. 1998. Principles of geographical information systems. – Oxford
Univ. Press, Oxford.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Busby, J.R. 1991. BIOCLIM – a bioclimatic analysis and prediction system. – In: Margules, C.R. &
Austin, M.P. (eds), Nature conservation: cost effective biological surveys and data analysis.
CSIRO, Melbourne, pp. 64-68.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Cajander, A.K. 1909. Über Waldtypen. – Acta for. fenn. 1: 1-175.
10.14214/aff.7526]Search in Google Scholar
[Cajander, A.K. 1913. Studien über die Moore Finnlands. – Acta for. fenn. 2: 1-208.
10.14214/aff.7530]Search in Google Scholar
[Cajander, A.K. 1921. Über Waldtypen II. I. Über Waldtypen im allgemeinen. – Acta for. fenn. 20:
1-41.
10.14214/aff.7061]Search in Google Scholar
[Callaway, R.M. 1995. Positive interactions among plants. – Bot. Rev. 61: 306-349.
10.1007/BF02912621]Search in Google Scholar
[Callaway, R.M., Brooker, R.W., Choler, P., Kikvidze, Z., Lortie, C.J., Michalet, R., Paolini, L., Pugnaire,
F.L., Newingham, B., Aschehoug, E.T., Armas, C., Kikodze, D. & Cook, B.J. 2002. Positive
interactions among alpine plants increase with stress. – Nature 417: 844-848.
10.1038/nature00812]Search in Google Scholar
[Callaway, R.M. & Walker, L.R. 1997. Competiton and facilitation: a synthetic approach to interactions
in plant communities. – Ecology 78: 1958-1965.
10.1890/0012-9658(1997)078[1958:CAFASA]2.0.CO;2]Search in Google Scholar
[Capinha, C. & Anastacio, P. 2011. Assessing the environmental requirements of invaders using
ensembles of distribution models. – Divers. Distrib. 17: 13-24.
10.1111/j.1472-4642.2010.00727.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Carlsson, B.Å. & Callaghan, T.V. 1991. Positive plant interactions in tundra vegetation and the
importance of shelter. – J. Ecol. 79: 973-983.
10.2307/2261092]Search in Google Scholar
[Cassini, M.H. 2011. Ecological principles of species distribution models: the habitat matching
rule. – J. Biogeogr. 38: 2057-2065.
10.1111/j.1365-2699.2011.02552.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Caswell, H. 2001. Matrix population models: construction, analysis, and interpretation, 2nd
ed. – Sinuauer, Sunderland, Mass.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Catford, J.A., Vesk, P.A., White, M.D. & Wintle, B.A. 2011. Hotspots of plant invasion predicted by
propagule pressure and ecosystem characteristics. – Divers. Distrib. 17: 1099-1110.
10.1111/j.1472-4642.2011.00794.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Cavieres, L.A. & Badano, E.I. 2009. Do facilitative interactions increase species richness at the
entire community level? – J. Ecol. 97: 1181-1191.
10.1111/j.1365-2745.2009.01579.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Cawsey, E.M., Austin, M.P. & Baker, B.L. 2002. Regional vegetation mapping in Australia: a case
study in the practical use of statistical modelling. – Biodiv. Conserv. 11: 2239-2274.
10.1023/A:1021350813586]Search in Google Scholar
[Chapman, D.S. 2010. Weak climatic associations among British plant distributions. – Global
Ecol. Biogeogr. 19: 831-841.
10.1111/j.1466-8238.2010.00561.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Chapman, D.S. & Purse, B.V. 2011. Community versus single-species distribution models for
British plants. – J. Biogeogr. 38: 1524-1535.
10.1111/j.1365-2699.2011.02517.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Chatfield, C. 1995. Model uncertainty, data mining and statistical inference. – J. r. Statist. Soc.
Ser. A 158: 419-466.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Chefaoui, R.M. & Lobo, J.M. 2008. Assessing the effects of pseudo-absences on predictive distribution
model performance. – Ecol. Modelling 210: 478-486.
10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.08.010]Search in Google Scholar
[Chiarucci, A., Araújo, M.B., Decocq, G., Beierkuhnlein, C. & Fernandez-Palacios, J.M. 2010. The
concept of potential natural vegetation: an epitaph? – J. Veg. Sci. 21: 1172-1178.
10.1111/j.1654-1103.2010.01218.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Choler, P., Michalet, R. & Callaway, R.M. 2001. Facilitation and competition on gradients in alpine
plant communities. – Ecology 82: 3295-3308.
10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[3295:FACOGI]2.0.CO;2]Search in Google Scholar
[Christensen, A.L. 2002. Det norske landskapet - om landskap og landskapsforståelse i kulturhistorisk
perspektiv. – Pax, Oslo.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Cianfrani, C., Le Lay, G., Hirzel, A.H. & Loy, A. 2010. Do habitat suitability models reliably predict
the recovery areas of threatened species? – J. appl. Ecol. 47: 421-430.
10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01781.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Claeskens, G. & Hjort, N.L. 2008. Model selection and model averaging. – Cambridge Univ. Press,
Cambridge.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Clements, F.E. 1916. Plant succession: an analysis of the development of the vegetation. – Carnegie
Inst. Wash. Publs 242: 1-512.
10.5962/bhl.title.56234]Search in Google Scholar
[Collins, S.L., Glenn, S.M. & Roberts, D.W. 1993. The hierarchical continuum concept. – J. Veg. Sci.
4: 149-156.
10.2307/3236099]Search in Google Scholar
[Colwell, R.K. & Rangel, T.F. 2009. Hutchinson‘s duality: the once and future niche. – Proc. natl.
Acad Sci. U.S. 106: 19651-19658.
10.1073/pnas.0901650106]Search in Google Scholar
[Combs, J.K., Reichard, S.H., Groom, M.J., Wilderman, D.L. & Camp, P.A. 2011. Invasive competitor
and native seed predators contribute to rarity of the narrow endemic Astragalus sinuatus
Piper. – Ecol. Appl. 21: 2498-2509.
10.1890/10-2344.1]Search in Google Scholar
[Conlisk, E., Conlisk, J., Enquist, B.J., Thompson, J. & Harte, J. 2009. Improved abundance prediction
from presence-absence data. – Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 18: 1-10.
10.1111/j.1466-8238.2008.00427.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Costa, G.C., Nogueira, C., Machado, R.B. & Colli, G.R. 2010. Sampling bias and the use of ecological
niche modeling in conservation planning: a field evaluation in a biodiversity hotspot.
– Biodiv. Conserv. 19: 883-899.
10.1007/s10531-009-9746-8]Search in Google Scholar
[Coudun, C., Gégout, J.-C., Piedallu, C. & Rameau, J.-C. 2006. Soil nutritional factors improve models
of plant species distribution: an illustration with Acer campestre (L.) in France. – J.
Biogeogr. 33: 1750-1763.
10.1111/j.1365-2699.2005.01443.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Cousins, S.A.O. 2006. Plant species richness in midfield islets and road verges - the effect of
landscape fragmentation. – Biol. Conserv. 127: 500-509.
10.1016/j.biocon.2005.09.009]Search in Google Scholar
[Cousins, S.A.O. 2009. Extinction debt in fragmented grasslands: paid or not? – J. Veg. Sci. 20:
3-7.
10.1111/j.1654-1103.2009.05647.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Cox, D.R. 1958. Two further applications of a model for binary regression. – Biometrika 45:
562-565.
10.1093/biomet/45.3-4.562]Search in Google Scholar
[Coxson, D.S. & Coyle, M. 2003. Niche partitioning and photosynthetic response of alectoroid
lichens from subalpine spruce-fir forest in north-central British Columbia, Canada: the
role of canopy microclimate gradients. – Lichenologist 35: 157-175.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Crawford, P.H.C. & Hoagland, B.W. 2009. Can herbarium records be used to map alien species invasion
and native species expansion over the past 100 years? – J. Biogeogr. 36: 651-661.
10.1111/j.1365-2699.2008.02043.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Crawley, M.J. 2007. The R book. – Wiley, Chichester.
10.1002/9780470515075]Search in Google Scholar
[Curtis, J.T. 1959. The vegetation of Wisconsin. – University of Wisconsin Press, Madison.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Dahl, E. 1957. Rondane: Mountain vegetation in South Norway and its relation to the environment.
– Skr. norske Vidensk.-Akad. Oslo mat.-naturvid. Klasse 1956: 3: 1-374.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Dahl, E. 1998. The phytogeography of northern Europe: British Isles, Fennoscandia and adjacent
areas. – Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
10.1017/CBO9780511565182]Search in Google Scholar
[Dargie, T.C.D. 1984. On the integrated interpretation of indirect site ordinations: a case study
using semi-arid vegetation in southeastern Spain. – Vegetatio 55: 37-55.
10.1007/BF00039980]Search in Google Scholar
[Davies, C.E., Moss, D. & Hill, M.O. 2004. EUNIS habitat classification revised 2004. – European
Environment Agency, http://eunis.eea.eu.int/related-reports.jsp.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Dawkins, R. 2009. The greatest show on earth: evidence for evolution. – Transworld, London.
de Siqueira, M.F., Durigan, G., de Marco Júnior, P. & Peterson, A.T. 2009. Something from nothing:
using landscape similarity and ecological niche modeling to find rare plant species. – J.
Nat. Conserv. 17: 25-32.
]Search in Google Scholar
[De’ath, G. 2007. Boosted trees for ecological modeling and prediction. – Ecology 88: 243-251.
10.1890/0012-9658(2007)88[243:BTFEMA]2.0.CO;2]Search in Google Scholar
[Diniz-Filho, J.A.F., Bini, L.M., Rangel, T.F., Loyola, R.D., Hof, C., Nogués-Bravo, D. & Araújo, M.B.
2009. Partitioning and mapping uncertainties in ensembles of forecasts of species turnover
under climate change. – Ecography 32: 897-906.
10.1111/j.1600-0587.2009.06196.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Dirnböck, T. & Dullinger, S. 2004. Habitat distribution models, spatial autocorrelation, functional traits and dispersal capacity of alpine plant species. – J. Veg. Sci. 15: 77-84.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Dobrowski, S.Z., Safford, H., D., Cheng, Y.B. & Ustin, S.L. 2008. Mapping mountain vegetation using
species distribution modeling, image-based texture analysis, and object-based classification.
– Appl. Veg. Sci. 11: 499-508.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Dormann, C. 2011. Modelling species’ distributions. – In: Jopp, F., Reuter, H. & Breckling, B.
(eds), Modelling complex ecological dynamics: an introduction into ecological modelling,
Springer, Berlin, pp. 179-196.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Dormann, C.F., McPherson, J.M., Araújo, M.B., Bivand, R., Bolliger, J., Carl, G., Davies, R.G., Hirzel,
A., Jetz, W., Kissling, W.D., Kühn, I., Ohlemüller, R., Peres-Neto, P.R., Reineking, B., Schröder,
B., Schurr, F.M. & Wilson, R. 2007. Methods to account for spatial autocorrelation in the
analysis of species distributional data: a review. – Ecography 30: 609-628.
10.1111/j.2007.0906-7590.05171.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Du Rietz, G.E. 1921. Zur metodologischen Grundlage der modernen Pflanzensoziologie. – Holzhausen,
Wien.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Du Rietz, G.E. 1936. Classification and nomenclature of vegetation units 1930-1935. – Svensk
bot. Tidskr. 30: 580-589.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Du Rietz, G.E. 1949. Huvudenheter och huvudgränser i svensk myrvegetation. – Svensk bot.
Tidskr. 43: 274-309.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Dubuis, A., Pottier, J., Rion, V., Pellissier, L., Theurillat, J.-P. & Guisan, A. 2011. Predicting spatial
patterns of plant species richness: a comparison of direct macroecological and species
stacking modelling approaches. – Divers. Distrib. 17: 1122-1131.
10.1111/j.1472-4642.2011.00792.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Dullinger, S., Dirnböck, T. & Grabherr, G. 2004. Modelling climate change-driven treeline shifts:
relative effects of temperature increase, dispersal and invasibility. – J. Ecol. 92: 241-
252.
10.1111/j.0022-0477.2004.00872.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Dungan, J.L., Perry, J.N., Dale, M.R.T., Legendre, P., Citron-Pousty, S., Fortin, M.-J., Jakomulska, A.,
Miriti, M. & Rosenberg, M.S. 2002. A balanced view of scale in spatial statistical analysis.
– Ecography 25: 626-640.
10.1034/j.1600-0587.2002.250510.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Ebeling, S.K., Welk, E., Auge, H. & Bruelheide, H. 2008. Predicting the spread of an invasive plant:
combining experiments and ecological niche model. – Ecography 31: 709-719.
10.1111/j.1600-0587.2008.05470.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Eckblad, F.E. 1981. Soppgeografi. – Universitetsforlaget, Oslo.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Edvardsen, A., Bakkestuen, V. & Halvorsen, R. 2011. A fine-grained spatial prediction model for
the red-listed vascular plant Scorzonera humilis. – Nord. J. Bot. 29: 495-504.
10.1111/j.1756-1051.2010.00984.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Edvardsen, A. & Økland, R.H. 2006. Variation in plant species composition in and adjacent to 64
ponds in SE Norwegian agricultural landscapes. – Aquat. Bot. 85: 92-102.
10.1016/j.aquabot.2006.01.015]Search in Google Scholar
[Edwards, T.C.J., Cutler, D.R., Zimmermann, N.E., Geiser, L. & Alegria, J. 2005. Model-based stratifications
for enhancing the detection of rare ecological events. – Ecology 86: 1081-1090.
10.1890/04-0608]Search in Google Scholar
[Edwards, T.C.J., Cutler, D.R., Zimmermann, N.E., Geiser, L. & Moisen, G.G. 2006. Effects of sample
survey design on the accuracy of classification tree models in species distribution models.
– Ecol. Modelling 199: 132-141.
10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.05.016]Search in Google Scholar
[Ehrenfeld, J.G. 2010. Ecosystem consequences of biological invasions. – A. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst.
41: 59-80.
10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-102209-144650]Search in Google Scholar
[Eilertsen, O. 1991. Vegetation patterns and structuring processes in coastal shell-beds at Akerøya,
Hvaler, SE Norway. – Sommerfeltia 12: 1-90.
10.2478/som-1991-0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Eilertsen, O., Økland, R.H., Økland, T. & Pedersen, O. 1990. Data manipulation and gradient length
estimation in DCA ordination. – J. Veg. Sci. 1: 261-270.
10.2307/3235663]Search in Google Scholar
[Ejrnæs, R. 2000. Can we trust gradients extracted by detrended correspondence analysis? – J.
Veg. Sci. 11: 565-572.
10.2307/3246586]Search in Google Scholar
[Elith, J. & Graham, C.H. 2009. Do they? How do they? WHY do they differ? On finding reasons for
differing performances of species distribution models. – Ecography 32: 66-77.
10.1111/j.1600-0587.2008.05505.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Elith, J., Graham, C.H., Anderson, R.P., Dudík, M., Ferrier, S., Guisan, A., Hijmans, R.J., Huettmann, F., Leathwick, J.R., Lehmann, A., Li, J., Lohmann, L.G., Loiselle, B.A., Manion, G., Moritz, C.,
Nakamura, M., Nakazawa, Y., Overton, J.M.M., Peterson, A.T., Phillips, S.J., Richardson, K.,
Scachetti-Pereira, R., Schapire, R.E., Soberón, J., Williams, S., Wisz, M.S. & Zimmermann,
N.E. 2006. Novel methods improve prediction of species’ distributions from occurrence
data. – Ecography 29: 129-151.
10.1111/j.2006.0906-7590.04596.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Elith, J., Kearney, M. & Phillips, S. 2010. The art of modelling range-shifting species. – Methods
Ecol. Evol. 1: 330-342.
10.1111/j.2041-210X.2010.00036.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Elith, J., Leathwich, J.R. & Hastie, T. 2008. A working guide to boosted regression trees. – J. Anim.
Ecol. 77: 802-813.
10.1111/j.1365-2656.2008.01390.x18397250]Search in Google Scholar
[Elith, J. & Leathwick, J.R. 2009. Species distribution models: ecological explanation and prediction
across space and time. – A. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 40: 677-697.
10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.110308.120159]Search in Google Scholar
[Elith, J., Phillips, S.J., Hastie, T., Dudík, M., Chee, Y.E. & Yates, C.J. 2011. A statistical explanation
of MaxEnt for ecologists. – Divers. Distrib. 17: 43-57.
10.1111/j.1472-4642.2010.00725.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Ellenberg, H. 1953. Physiologisches und ökologisches Verhalten derselben Pflanzenarten. – Ber.
dt. bot. Ges. 65: 350-361.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Ellenberg, H., Weber, H.E., Düll, R., Wirth, V. & Werner, W. 2001. Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in
Mitteleuropa. – Scr. geobot. 18 (ed. 3): 1-262.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Elton, C.S. 1927. Animal ecology. – Sidgwick & Jackson, London.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Elvebakk, A., Elven, R., Spjelkavik, S., Thannheiser, D. & Schweitzer, H.-J. 1994. Botrychium boreale
and Puccinellia angustata ssp. palibinii new to Svalbard. – Polarflokken 18: 133-140.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Elven, R. 1980. The Omnsbreen glaciers nunataks - a case study of plant immigration. – Norw.
J. Bot. 7: 1-16.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Elven, R., Alm, T., Edvardsen, H., Fjelland, M., Fredriksen, K.E. & Johansen, V. 1988. Botaniske
verdier på havstrender i Nordland. A. Generell innledning. Beskrivelser for region Sør-
Helgeland. – Økoforsk Rapp. 1988: 2A: 1-334.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Emanuelsson, U. 2009. Europeiska kulturlandskap: Hur människan format Europas natur.
–Formas, Stockholm.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Eneroth, O. 1931. Om skogstyper och föryngringsförhållanden inom Lappmarken. I. – Norrl.
Skogsvårdsförb. Tidskr. 1931: 113-182.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Engler, R., Randin, C.F., Thuiller, W., Dullinger, S., Zimmermann, N.E., Araújo, M.B., Pearman, P.B.,
Le Lay, G., Piedallu, C., Albert, C.H., Choler, P., Coldea, G., de Lamo, X., Dirnböck, T., Gégout,
J.C., Gómez-García, D., Grytnes, J.A., Heegaard, E., Høistad, F., Nogués-Bravo, D., Normand,
S., Puşcaş, M., Sebastià, M.T., Stanisci, A., Theurillat, J.P., Trivedi, M.R., Vittoz, P. & Guisan,
A. 2011. 21st century climate change threatens mountain flora unequally across Europe.
– Global Change Biol. 17: 2330-2341.
10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02393.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Engler, R., Randin, C.F., Vittoz, P., Czáka, T., Beniston, M., Zimmermann, N.E. & Guisan, A. 2009.
Predicting future distributions of mountain plants under climate change: does dispersal
capacity matter? – Ecography 32: 34-45.
10.1111/j.1600-0587.2009.05789.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Eriksson, O. 1993. The species-pool hypothesis and plant community diversity. – Oikos 68:
371-374.
10.2307/3544854]Search in Google Scholar
[Eriksson, O. 1996. Regional dynamics of plants: a review of evidence for remnant, source-sink
and metapopulations. – Oikos 77: 248-258.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Eriksson, O. 2000. Functional roles of remnant plant populations in communities and ecosystems.
– Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 9: 443-449.
10.1046/j.1365-2699.2000.00215.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Eriksson, O. & Ehrlén, J. 1992. Seed and microsite limitation of recruitment in plant populations.
– Oecologia 91: 360-364.
10.1007/BF0031762428313543]Search in Google Scholar
[Erkamo, V. 1956. Untersuchungen über die Pflanzenbiologischen und einige andere Folgeerscheinungen
der neuzeitlichen Klimatschwankung in Finland. – Annls bot. Soc. zool.-bot.
fenn. Vanamo 28: 3: 1-248.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Erkamo, V. 1958. Kesän 1955 kuivuudesta ja sen vaikutuksesta kasveihin erityisesti Etelä-
Suomessa (Deutsches Ref.: Über die Dürre des Sommers 1955 und deres Einwirkung auf
die Pflanzen besonders in Südfinnland). – Annls bot. Soc. zool.-bot. fenn. Vanamo 30: 2:
1-45.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Etzelmüller, B., Romstad, B. & Fjellanger, J. 2007. Automatic regional classification of topography
in Norway. – Norw. J. Geol. 87: 167-180.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Fægri, K. 1934. Über die Längevariation einiger Gletscher des Jostedalsbre und die dadurch
bedingten Planzensukzessionen. – Bergens Mus. Årb. naturv. Rekke 1933: 7: 1-255.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Feagin, R.A., Sherman, D.J. & Grant, W.E. 2005. Coastal erosion, global sea-level rise, and the loss
of sand dune plant habitats. – Front. Ecol. Environm. 3: 359-364.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Feeley, K.J. & Silman, M.R. 2011. Keep collecting: accurate species distribution modelling requires
more collections than previously thought. – Divers. Distrib. 17: 1132-1140.
10.1111/j.1472-4642.2011.00813.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Feldmeyer-Christe, E., Küchler, M. & Wildi, O. 2011. Patterns of early succession on bare peat in
a Swiss mire after a bog burst. – J. Veg. Sci. 22: 943-954.
10.1111/j.1654-1103.2011.01302.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Ferrier, S., Watson, G., Pearse, J. & Drielsma, M. 2002. Extended statistical approaches to modelling
spatial pattern in biodiversity in northeast New South Wales. I. Species-level modelling.
– Biodiv. Conserv. 11: 2275-2307.
10.1023/A:1021302930424]Search in Google Scholar
[Fielding, A.H. & Bell, J.E. 1997. A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in
conservation presence-absence models. – Environm. Conserv. 24: 38-49.
10.1017/S0376892997000088]Search in Google Scholar
[Førland, E.J. 1979. Nedbørens høydeavhengighet. – Klima 2: 2-34.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Førland, E.J. 1993. Nedbørnormaler, normalperiode 1961-1990. – Norske meteorol. Inst. Rapp.
Klima 1993: 39: 1-63.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Forzieri, G., Guarnieri, L., Vivoni, E.R., Castelli, F. & Preti, F. 2009. Multiple attribute decision
making for individual tree detection using high-resolution laser scanning. – For. Ecol.
Mgmt 258: 2501-2510.
10.1016/j.foreco.2009.09.006]Search in Google Scholar
[Frahm, J.-P. & Klaus, D. 2001. Bryophytes as indicators of recent climate fluctuations in Central
Europe. – Lindbergia 26: 97-104.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Franklin, J. 1995. Predictive vegetation mapping: geographic modelling of biospatial patterns
in relation to environmental gradients. – Prog. phys. Geogr. 19: 474-499.
10.1177/030913339501900403]Search in Google Scholar
[Franklin, J. 2009. Mapping species distributions: spatial inference and prediction. – Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
10.1017/CBO9780511810602]Search in Google Scholar
[Franklin, J. 2010. Moving beyond static species distribution models in support of conservation
biogeography. – Divers. Distrib. 16: 321-330.
10.1111/j.1472-4642.2010.00641.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Freestone, A.L. 2006. Facilitation drives local abundance and regional distribution of a rare plant
in harsh environment. – Ecology 87: 2728-2735.
10.1890/0012-9658(2006)87[2728:FDLAAR]2.0.CO;2]Search in Google Scholar
[Fremstad, E. 1981. Flommarksvegetasjon ved Orkla, Sør-Trøndelag. – Gunneria 38: 1-90.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Fries, T.C.E. 1913. Botanische Untersuchungen in nördlichsten Schweden: Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis
der alpinen und subalpinen Vegetation in Torne Lappmark. – Vetensk. prakt. Unders.
Lappl. Flora Fauna 2: 1-361.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Gastón, A. & García-Viñas, J.I. 2011. Modelling species distributions with penalised logistic regressions:
a comparison with maximum entropy models. – Ecol. Modelling 222: 2037-2041.
10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.04.015]Search in Google Scholar
[Gaston, K.J. 1991. How large is a species’ geographic range? – Oikos 61: 434–438.
10.2307/3545251]Search in Google Scholar
[Gaston, K.J., Chown, S.L. & Evans, K.L. 2008. Ecogeographical rules: elements of a synthesis. – J.
Biogeogr. 35: 483-500.
10.1111/j.1365-2699.2007.01772.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Gaston, K.J. & Fuller, R.A. 2009. The sizes of species‘ geographic ranges. – J. appl. Ecol. 46: 1-9.
10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01596.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Gauch, H.G. Jr 1982a. Multivariate analysis in community ecology. – Camb. Stud. Ecol. 1:
1-298.
10.1017/CBO9780511623332]Search in Google Scholar
[Gauch, H.G. Jr 1982b. Noise reduction by eigenvector ordinations. – Ecology 63: 1643-1649.
10.2307/1940105]Search in Google Scholar
[Gauch, H.G. Jr & Chase, G.B. 1974. Fitting the gaussian curve to ecological data. – Ecology 55: 1377-1381.
10.2307/1935465]Search in Google Scholar
[Gauch, H.G. Jr & Whittaker, R.H. 1972. Coenocline simulation. – Ecology 53: 446-451.
10.2307/1934231]Search in Google Scholar
[Gauslaa, Y. 2002. Die back of epiphytic lichens in SE Norway - can it be caused by high rainfall
in late autumn? – Graphis Scr. 13: 33-35.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Gibson, L.A., Wilson, B.A., Cahill, D.M. & Hill, J. 2004. Spatial prediction of rufous bristlebird
habitat in a coastal heathland: a GIS-based approach. – J. appl. Ecol. 41: 213-223.
10.1111/j.0021-8901.2004.00896.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Giesecke, T., Hickler, T., Kunkel, T., Sykes, M.T. & Bradshaw, R.H.W. 2007. Towards an understanding
of the Holocene distribution of Fagus sylvatica L. – J. Biogeogr. 34: 118-131.
10.1111/j.1365-2699.2006.01580.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Giesecke, T., Miller, P.A., Sykes, M.T., Ojala, A.E.K., Seppä, H. & Bradshaw, R.H.W. 2010. The effect
of past changes in inter-annual temperature variability on tree distribution limits. – J.
Biogeogr. 37: 1394-1405.
10.1111/j.1365-2699.2010.02296.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Gjærevoll, O. 1956. The plant communities of the Scandinavian alpine snow-beds. – K. norske
Vidensk. Selsk. Skr. 1956: 1: 1-405.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Gleason, H.A. 1926. The individualistic concept of the plant association. – Bull. Torrey bot. Club
53: 7-26.
10.2307/2479933]Search in Google Scholar
[Godsoe, W. 2010. I can’t define the niche but I know it when I see it: a formal link between
statistical theory and the ecological niche. – Oikos 119: 53-60.
10.1111/j.1600-0706.2009.17630.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Gogol-Prokurat, M. 2011. Predicting habitat suitability for rare plants at local spatial scales
using a species distribution model. – Ecol. Appl. 21: 33-47.
10.1890/09-1190.121516886]Search in Google Scholar
[Goldberg, D.E. 1990. Components of resource competition in plant communities. – In: Grace,
J.B. & Tilman, D. (eds), Perspectives on plant competition, Academic Press, San Diego,
pp. 27-49.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Goodall, D.W. 1963. The continuum and the individualistic association. – Vegetatio 11: 297-
316.
10.1007/BF00303795]Search in Google Scholar
[Gormley, A.M., Forsyth, D.M., Griffioen, P., Lindeman, M., Ramsey, D.S.L., Scroggie, M.P. & Woodford,
L. 2011. Using presence-only and presence-absence data to estimate the current and
potential distributions of established invasive species. – J. appl. Ecol. 48: 25-34.
10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01911.x303834721339812]Search in Google Scholar
[Gower, J.C. 1967. Multivariate analysis and multidimensional geometry. – Statistician 17: 13-
28.
10.2307/2987199]Search in Google Scholar
[Graae, B.J., Økland, R.H., Petersen, P.M., Jensen, K. & Fritzbøger, B. 2004. Influence of historical,
geographical and environmental variables on understorey composition and richness in
Danish forests. – J. Veg. Sci. 15: 465-474.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Grace, J.B. 1999. The factors controlling species density in herbaceous plant communities: an
assessment. – Perspect. Pl. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2: 1-28.
10.1078/1433-8319-00063]Search in Google Scholar
[Grace, J.B., Anderson, M., Olff, H. & Scheiner, S.M. 2010. On the specification of structural equation
models for ecological systems. – Ecol. Monogr. 80: 67-87.
10.1890/09-0464.1]Search in Google Scholar
[Grace, J.B. & Pugesek, B.H. 1997. A structural equation model of plant species richness and its
application to a coastal wetland. – Am. Nat. 149: 436-460.
10.1086/285999]Search in Google Scholar
[Grime, J.P. 1977. Evidence for the existence of three primary strategies in plants and its relevance
to ecological and evolutionary theory. – Am. Nat. 111: 1169-1194.
10.1086/283244]Search in Google Scholar
[Grime, J.P. 1979. Plant strategies and vegetation processes. – Wiley, Chichester.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Grime, J.P. & Lloyd, P.S. 1973. An ecological atlas of grassland plants. – Arnold, London.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Grinnell, J. 1917. The niche-relationships of the California Thrasher. – Auk 34: 427-433.
10.2307/4072271]Search in Google Scholar
[Guinan, J., Brown, C., Dolan, M.F.J. & Grehan, A.J. 2009. Ecological niche modelling of the distribution
of cold-water coral habitat using underwater remote sensing data. – Ecol. Inf. 4.
10.1016/j.ecoinf.2009.01.004]Search in Google Scholar
[Guisan, A., Broennimann, O., Engler, R., Vust, M., Yoccoz, N.G., Lehmann, A. & Zimmermann, N.E.
2006a. Using niche-based models to improve the sampling of rare species. – Conserv.
Biol. 20: 501-511.
10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00354.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Guisan, A., Edwards, T.C. & Hastie, T. 2002. Generalized linear and generalized additive models in studies of species distributions: setting the scene. – Ecol. Modelling 157: 89-100.
10.1016/S0304-3800(02)00204-1]Search in Google Scholar
[Guisan, A., Graham, C.H., Elith, J., Huettmann, F. & The NCEAS Species Distribution Modelling
Group, 2007. Sensitivity of predictive species distribution models to change in grain size.
– Divers. Distrib. 13: 332-340.
10.1111/j.1472-4642.2007.00342.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Guisan, A., Lehmann, A., Ferrier, S., Austin, M., Overton, J.M.C., Aspinall, R. & Hastie, T. 2006b.
Making better biogeographical predictions of species‘ distributions. – J. appl. Ecol. 43:
386-392.
10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01164.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Guisan, A. & Thuiller, W. 2005. Predicting species distribution: offering more than simple habitat
models. – Ecol. Letters 8: 993-1009.
10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00792.x34517687]Search in Google Scholar
[Guisan, A., Weiss, S.B. & Weiss, A.D. 1999. GLM versus CCA spatial modeling of plant species
distribution. – Pl. Ecol. 143: 107-122.
10.1023/A:1009841519580]Search in Google Scholar
[Guisan, A. & Zimmermann, N.E. 2000. Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology. – Ecol.
Modelling 135: 147-186.
10.1016/S0304-3800(00)00354-9]Search in Google Scholar
[Gunnarsson, U., Malmer, N. & Rydin, H. 2002. Dynamics or constancy in Sphagnum dominated
mire ecosystems? A 40-year study. – Ecography 25: 685-704.
10.1034/j.1600-0587.2002.250605.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Hacking, I. 1999. The social construction of what? – Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Mass..
]Search in Google Scholar
[Hafsten, U. 1992. The immigration and spread of Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) in
Norway. – Norsk geogr. Tidsskr. 46: 121-158.
10.1080/00291959208552291]Search in Google Scholar
[Halvorsen, R. 2011. Faglig grunnlag for naturtypeovervåking i Norge – begreper, prinsipper og
verktøy –Univ. Oslo NatHist. Mus. Rapp. 10: 1-117.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Halvorsen, R. in press. A strict maximum likelihood explanation of MaxEnt, and some implications
for distribution modelling. – Sommerfeltia, in press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Halvorsen, R., Andersen, T., Blom, H.H., Elvebakk, A., Elven, R., Erikstad, L., Gaarder, G., Moen, A.,
Mortensen, P.B., Norderhaug, A., Nygaard, K., Thorsnes, T. & Ødegaard, F. 2009. Naturtyper
i Norge (NiN) versjon 1.0.0. – Artsdatabanken, Trondheim.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Halvorsen, R. & Heegaard, E. 2011. Sannsynlighetsbasert datainnsamling – teori, begreper og
en simuleringsundersøkelse. – Univ. Oslo NatHist. Mus. Rapp. 11: 197-221.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Hamre, L.N., Domaas, S.T., Austad, I. & Rydgren, K. 2007. Analyses of land-cover and structural
changes in a western Norwegian cultural landscape since 1865, using an old cadastral
map and a field survey of the present landscape. – Landsc. Ecol. 22: 1563-1574.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Hamre, L.N., Halvorsen, R., Edvardsen, A. & Rydgren, K. 2010. Plant species richness, composition
and habitat specificity in a Norwegian agricultural landscape. – Agric. Ecosyst. Environm.
138: 189-196.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Hanley, J.A. & McNeil, B.J. 1982. The meaning and use of the area under a Receiver Operating
Characteristic (ROC) curve. – Radiology 143: 29-36.
10.1148/radiology.143.1.70637477063747]Search in Google Scholar
[Hanski, I. 1982. Dynamics of regional distribution: the core and satellite species hypothesis. –
Oikos 38: 210-221.
10.2307/3544021]Search in Google Scholar
[Hanski, I. 2004. Metapopulation theory, its use and misuse. – Basic appl. Ecol. 5: 225-229.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Hanski, I. & Gilpin, M. 1991. Metapopulations dynamics: brief history and conceptual domain.
– Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 42: 3-16.
10.1016/B978-0-12-284120-0.50004-8]Search in Google Scholar
[Harper, J.L. 1977. Population biology of plants. – Academic Press, London.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Harper, J.L. 1981. The meanings of rarity. In: Synge, H. (ed.), The biological aspects of rare plant
conservation, Wiley, New York, pp. 189-203.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Harrell, F.E., Lee, F.L. & Mark, D.B. 1996. Multivariate prognostic models: issues in developing
models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors. –
Statist. Med. 15: 361-387.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R. & Friedman, J. 2009. The elements of statistical learning, ed. 2. – Springer,
New York.
10.1007/978-0-387-84858-7]Search in Google Scholar
[He, F. & Gaston, K.J. 2000. Occupancy-abundance relationships and sampling scales. – Ecography 23: 503-511.
10.1111/j.1600-0587.2000.tb00306.x]Search in Google Scholar
[He, F. & Legendre, P. 1996. On species-area relations. – Am. Nat. 148: 719-737.
10.1086/285950]Search in Google Scholar
[Heegaard, E. 1997. Ecology of Andreaea in western Norway. – J. Bryol. 19: 527-636.
10.1179/jbr.1997.19.3.527]Search in Google Scholar
[Heegaard, E., Økland, R.H., Bratli, H., Dramstad, W.E., Engan, G., Pedersen, O. & Solstad, H. 2007.
Regularity of species richness - relationships to patch size and shape. – Ecography 30:
589-597.
10.1111/j.0906-7590.2007.04989.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Heikkinen, R.K., Luoto, M., Araújo, M.B., Virkkala, R., Thuiller, W. & Sykes, M.T. 2006. Methods
and uncertainties in bioclimatic envelope modelling under climate change. – Prog. phys.
Geogr. 30: 751-777.
10.1177/0309133306071957]Search in Google Scholar
[Heilmann-Clausen, J. 2001. A gradient analysis of communities of macrofungi and slime moulds
on decaying beech logs. – Mycol. Res. 105: 575-596.
10.1017/S0953756201003665]Search in Google Scholar
[Hemsing, L.Ø. & Bryn, A. 2012. Three methods for modelling potential natural vegetation (PNV)
compared: a methodological case study from south-central Norway. – Norsk geogr. Tidskr.
66: 11-29.
10.1080/00291951.2011.644321]Search in Google Scholar
[Hengeveld, R. & Haeck, J. 1981. The distribution of abundance. II. Models and implications. –
Proc. k. ned. Akad. Wetensch. Ser. C. 84: 257-284.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Hengeveld, R. & Haeck, J. 1982. The distribution of abundance. I. Measurements. – J. Biogeogr.
9: 303-316.
10.2307/2844717]Search in Google Scholar
[Henriksen, A., Skjelkvåle, B.L., Mannio, J., Wilander, A., Harriman, R., Curtis, C., Jensen, J.P., Fjeld,
E. & Moiseenko, T. 1995. Northern European lake survey, 1995. – Ambio 27: 80-91.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Hernandez, P.A., Graham, C.H., Master, L.L. & Albert, D.L. 2006. The effect of sample size and
species characteristics on performance of different species distribution modeling methods.
– Ecography 29: 773-785.
10.1111/j.0906-7590.2006.04700.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Hesthagen, T., Sevaldrud, I.H. & Berger, H.M. 1999. Assessment of damage to fish populations
in Norwegian lakes due to acidification. – Ambio 28: 112-117.
]Search in Google Scholar
[Hijmans, R.J., Cameron, S.E., Parra, J.L., Jones, P.G. & Jarvis, A. 2005. Very high resolution interpolated
climate surfaces for global land areas. – Int. J. Climatol. 25: 1965-1978.
10.1002/joc.1276]Search in Google Scholar
[Hill, M.O. & Gauch, H.G. Jr 1980. Detrended correspondence analysis: an improved ordination
technique. – Vegetatio 42: 47-58.
10.1007/978-94-009-9197-2_7]Search in Google Scholar
[Hill, R.A. & Broughton, R.K. 2009. Mapping the understorey of deciduous woodland from leaf-on
and leaf-off airborne LiDAR data: a case study from lowland Britain. – ISPRS J. Photogrammetry
remote Sensing 64: 223-233.
10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2008.12.004]Search in Google Scholar
[Hirzel, A. & Guisan, A. 2002. Which is the optimal sampling strategy for habitat suitability modelling.
– Ecol. Modelling 157: 331-341.
10.1016/S0304-3800(02)00203-X]Search in Google Scholar
[Hirzel, A.H., Hausser, J., Chessel, D. & Perrin, N. 2002. Ecological-niche factor analysis: how to
compute habitat-suitability maps without absence data? – Ecology 83: 2027-2036.
10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[2027:ENFAHT]2.0.CO;2]Search in Google Scholar
[Hirzel, A.H. & Le Lay, G. 2008. Habitat suitability modelling and niche theory. – J. appl. Ecol. 45:
1372-1381.
10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01524.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Hirzel, A.H., Le Lay, G., Helfer, V., Randin, C. & Guisan, A. 2006. Evaluating the ability of habitat
suitability models to predict species presences. – Ecol. Modelling 199: 142-152.
10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.05.017]Search in Google Scholar
[Hjort, J. & Marmion, M. 2009. Periglacial distribution modelling with a boosting method. – Permafr.
periglac. Proc 20: 15-25.10.1002/ppp.629]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hörnberg, G., Östlund, L., Zackrisson, O. & Bergman, I. 1999. The genesis of two Picea-Cladina
forests in northern Sweden. – J. Ecol. 87: 800-814.10.1046/j.1365-2745.1999.00399.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hörnberg, G., Ohlson, M. & Zackrisson, O. 1995. Stand dynamics, regeneration patterns and
long-term continuity in boreal old-growth Picea abies swamp-forests. – J. Veg. Sci. 6:
291-298.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Holien, H. 1997. The lichen flora on Picea abies in a suboceanic spruce forest area in Central
Norway with emphasis on the relationship to site and stand parameters. – Nord. J. Bot. 17: 55-76.10.1111/j.1756-1051.1997.tb00290.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Holmgren, J. & Persson, Å. 2004. Identifying species of individual trees using airborne laser
scanner data. – Remote Sensing Environm. 90: 415-423.10.1016/S0034-4257(03)00140-8]Search in Google Scholar
[
Holten, J.I. & Aune, E.I. 2011. Altitudinal distribution patterns of alpine plants: Studies along a
coast-inland transect in southern Scandes, northern Europe. – Tapir, Trondheim.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hooten, M.B., Wikle, C.K., Sheriff, S.L. & Rushin, J.W. 2009. Optimal spatio-temporal hybrid sampling
designs for ecological monitoring. – J. Veg. Sci. 20: 639-649.10.1111/j.1654-1103.2009.01040.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hortal, J., Jiménez-Valverde, A., Gómez, J.F., Lobo, J.M. & Baselga, A. 2008. Historical bias in
biodiversity inventories affects the observed environmental niche of the species. – Oikos
117: 847-858.10.1111/j.0030-1299.2008.16434.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hortal, J., Roura-Pascual, N., Sanders, N.J. & Rahbek, C. 2010. Understanding (insect) species
distributions across spatial scales. – Ecography 33: 51-53.10.1111/j.1600-0587.2009.06428.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hovstad, K.A., Borvik, S. & Ohlson, M. 2009. Epizoochorous seed dispersal in relation to seed
availability – an experiment with a red fox dummy. – J. Veg. Sci. 20: 455-464.10.1111/j.1654-1103.2009.01049.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Huisman, J., Olff, H. & Fresco, L.F.M. 1993. A hierarchical set of models for species response
analysis. – J. Veg. Sci. 4: 37-46.10.2307/3235732]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hultén, E. 1971. Atlas över växternas utbredning i Norden. – Generalstabens litografiska anstalt,
Stockholm.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Huntley, B., Bartlein, P.J. & Prentice, I.C. 1989. Climatic control of the distribution and abundance
of beech (Fagus L.) in Europe and North America. – J. Biogeogr. 16: 551-560.10.2307/2845210]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hurlbert, S.H. 1971. The nonconcept of species diversity: a critique and alternative parameters.
– Ecology 52: 577-586.10.2307/193414528973811]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hutchings, M.J. 1997. The structure of plant populations. – In: Crawley, M.J. (ed.), Plant ecology,
Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 325-358.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hutchinson, G.E. 1957. Concluding remarks. – Cold Spring Harbor Symp. quantve Biol. 22:
415-427.10.1101/SQB.1957.022.01.039]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hutchinson, G.E. 1978. An introduction to population ecology. – Yale University Press, New
Haven.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Høiland, K. & Bendiksen, E. 1997. Biodiversity of wood-inhabiting fungi in a boreal coniferous
forest in Sør-Trøndelag County, Central Norway. – Nord. J. Bot. 16: 643-659.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Inderjit & Mallik, A.U. 1997. Effects of Ledum groenlandicum on soil characteristics and black
spruce seedling growth. – Pl. Ecol. 133: 29-36.10.1023/A:1009781011591]Search in Google Scholar
[
Inderjit, Wardle, D.A., Karban, R. & Callaway, R.M. 2011. The ecosystem and evolutionary contexts
of allelopathy. – Trends Ecol. Evol. 26: 655-662.10.1016/j.tree.2011.08.00321920626]Search in Google Scholar
[
Iversen, J. 1944. Viscum, Hedera and Ilex as climate indicators. – Geol. Fören. Stockh. Förh. 66:
463-483.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ives, A.R. 1995. Measuring resilience in stochastic systems. – Ecol. Monogr. 65: 217-233.10.2307/2937138]Search in Google Scholar
[
Jacobson, B. & Peres-Neto, P.R. 2010. Quantifying and disentangling dispersal in metacommunities:
how close have we come? How far is there to go? – Landsc. Ecol. 25: 495-507.10.1007/s10980-009-9442-9]Search in Google Scholar
[
Jäderlund, A., Zackrisson, O. & Nilsson, M.C. 1996. Effects of bilberry (Vaccinium myrtillus L.)
litter on seed germination and early seedling growth of four boreal tree species. – J. chem.
Ecol. 22: 973-986.10.1007/BF0202994824227618]Search in Google Scholar
[
Jansson, R., Nilsson, C., Dynesius, M. & Andersson, E. 2000. Effects of river regulation on rivermargin
vegetation: a comparison of eight boreal rivers. – Ecol. Appl. 10: 203-224.10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[0203:EORROR]2.0.CO;2]Search in Google Scholar
[
Jarnevich, C.S. & Reynolds, L.V. 2011. Challenges of predicting the potential distribution of a
slow-spreading invader: a habitat suitability map for an invasive riparian tree. – Biol.
Invasions 13: 153-163.10.1007/s10530-010-9798-4]Search in Google Scholar
[
Jaynes, E.T. 1957. Information theory and statistical mechanics. – Phys. Rev. 106: 620-630.10.1103/PhysRev.106.620]Search in Google Scholar
[
Jelinski, D.E. & Wu, J. 1996. The modifiable areal unit problem and implications for landscape ecology. – Landsc. Ecol. 11: 129-140.
Jiménez-Valverde, A., Lobo, J. & Hortal, J. 2008. Not as good as they seem: the importance of
concepts in species distribution modelling. – Divers. Distrib. 14: 885-890.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Jiménez-Valverde, A., Lobo, J.M. & Hortal, J. 2009. The effect of prevalence and its interaction
with sample size on the reliability of species distribution models. – Comm. Ecol. 10: 196-
205.10.1556/ComEc.10.2009.2.9]Search in Google Scholar
[
Johnson, J.B. & Omland, K.S. 2004. Model selection in ecology and evolution. – Trends Ecol. Evol.
19: 101-108.10.1016/j.tree.2003.10.013]Search in Google Scholar
[
Jones, C.C., Acker, S.A. & Halpern, C.B. 2010. Combining local- and large-scale models to predict
the distributions of invasive plant species. – Ecol. Appl. 20: 311-326.10.1890/08-2261.1]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kadmon, R., Farber, O. & Danin, A. 2003. A systematic analysis of factors affecting the performance
of climatic envelope models. – Ecol. Appl. 13: 853-867.10.1890/1051-0761(2003)013[0853:ASAOFA]2.0.CO;2]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kadmon, R., Farber, O. & Danin, A. 2004. Effect of roadside bias on the accuracy of predictive
maps produced by bioclimatic models. – Ecol. Appl. 14: 401-413.10.1890/02-5364]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kalela, A. 1954. Zur Stellung der Waldtypen im System der Pflanzengesellschaften. – Vegetatio
5-6: 50-62.10.1007/BF00299553]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kalusova, V., Le Duc, M.G., Gilbert, J.C., Lawson, C.S., Gowing, D.J.G. & Marrs, R.H. 2009. Determining
the important environmental variables controlling plant species community composition
in mesotrophic grasslands in Great Britain. – Appl. Veg. Sci. 12: 459-471.10.1111/j.1654-109X.2009.01041.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Karlsson, P.S. & Weih, M. 2003. Long-term patterns of leaf, shoot and wood production after
insect herbivory in the mountain birch. – Funct. Ecol. 17: 841-850.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kearney, M. 2006. Habitat, environment and niche: what are we modelling? – Oikos 115: 186-
191.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kearney, M. & Porter, W.P. 2004. Mapping the fundamental niche: physiology, climate and the
distribution of nocturnal lizards across Australia. – Ecology 85: 3119-3131.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kearney, M. & Porter, W.P. 2009. Mechanistic niche modelling: combining physiological and
spatial data to predict species’ ranges. – Ecol. Letters 12: 334-350.10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01277.x19292794]Search in Google Scholar
[
Keddy, P.A. & MacLellan, P. 1990. Centrifugal organization in forests. – Oikos 59: 75-84.
Kéry, M. 2011. Towards the modelling of true species distributions. – J. Biogeogr. 38: 617-618.
Kéry, M., Gardner, B. & Monnerat, C. 2010. Predicting species distributions from checklist data
using site-occupancy models. – J. Biogeogr. 37: 1851-1862.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kiviniemi, K. 2009. Remnant population dynamics in the facultative biennial Carum carvi in
fragmented semi-natural grasslands. – Popul. Ecol. 51: 197-208.10.1007/s10144-008-0096-2]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ko, C.Y., Root, T.L. & Lee, P.F. 2011. Movement distances enhance validity of predictive models.
– Ecol. Modelling 222: 947-954.10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2010.12.001]Search in Google Scholar
[
Korpela, I., Koskinen, M., Vasander, H., Holopainen, M. & Minkkinen, K. 2009. Airborne smallfootprint
discrete-return LiDAR data in the assessment of boreal mire surface patterns,
vegetation, and habitats. – For. Ecol. Mgmt, 259: 1549-1566.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kotliar, N.B. & Wiens, J.A. 1990. Multiple scales of patchiness and patch structure: a hierarchical
framework for the study of heterogeneity. – Oikos 59: 253-260.10.2307/3545542]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kriticos, D.J. & Leriche, A. 2010. The effects of climate data precision on fitting and projecting
species niche models. – Ecography 33: 115-127.10.1111/j.1600-0587.2009.06042.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kruys, N., Fries, C., Jonsson, B.G., Lämås, T. & Ståhl, G. 1999. Wood-inhabiting cryptogams on
dead Norway spruce (Picea abies) trees in managed Swedish boreal forests. – Can. J. For.
Res. 29: 178-186.10.1139/x98-191]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kuhn, T.S. 1996. The structure of scientific revolutions, ed. 3. – Chicago, University of Chicago
Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226458106.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kushnevskaya, H., Mirin, D. & Shorohova, E. 2007. Patterns of epixylic vegetation on spruce logs
in late-successional boreal forests. – For. Ecol. Mgmt 250: 25-33.10.1016/j.foreco.2007.03.006]Search in Google Scholar
[
Köckemann, B., Buschmann, H. & Leuschner, C. 2009. The relationships between abundance,
range size and niche breadth in Central European tree species. – J. Biogeogr. 36: 854-
864.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kylin, H. 1926. Über Begriffsbildung und Statistik in der Pflanzensoziologie. – Bot. Not. 79:
81-180.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lambdon, P.W., Pyšek, P., Basnou, C., Hejda, M., Arianoutsou, M., Essl, F., Jarošík, V., Pergl, J.,
Winter, M., Anastasiu, P., Andriopoulos, P., Bazos, I., Brundu, G., Celesti-Grapow, L., Chassot,
P., Delipetrou, P., Josefsson, M., Kark, S., Klotz, S., Kokkoris, Y., Kuhn, I., Marchante, H.,
Perglová, I., Pino, J., Vilà, M., Zikos, A., Roy, D. & Hulme, P.E. 2008. Alien flora of Europe:
species diversity, temporal trends, geographical patterns and research needs. – Preslia
80: 101-149.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lassueur, T., Joost, S. & Randin, C.F. 2006. Very high resolution digital elevation models: do they
improve models of plant species distribution? – Ecol. Modelling 198: 139-153.10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.04.004]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lavorel, S. & Garnier, E. 2002. Predicting changes in community composition and ecosystem
functioning from plant traits: revisiting the Holy Grail. – Funct. Ecol. 16: 545-556.
Lawton, J.H. 1996. Patterns in ecology. – Oikos 75: 145-147.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lawton, J.H. 1999. Are there general laws in ecology? – Oikos 84: 177-192.10.2307/3546712]Search in Google Scholar
[
Le Lay, G., Engler, R., Franc, E. & Guisan, A. 2010. Prospective sampling based on model ensembles
improves the detection of rare species. – Ecography 33: 1015-1027.10.1111/j.1600-0587.2010.06338.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Leathwick, J.R. 1995. Climatic relationships of some New Zealand forest tree species. – J. Veg.
Sci. 6: 237-248.10.2307/3236219]Search in Google Scholar
[
Leathwick, J.R. & Austin, M.P. 2001. Competitive interactions between tree species in New
Zealandʼs old-growth indigenous forests. – Ecology 82: 2560-2573.10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[2560:CIBTSI]2.0.CO;2]Search in Google Scholar
[
Leathwick, J.R., Elith, J. & Hastie, T. 2006. Comparative performance of generalized additive
models and multivariate adaptive regression splines for statistical modelling of species
distributions. – Ecol. Modelling 199: 188-196.10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.05.022]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lefsky, M.A., Cohen, W.B., Parker, G.G. & Harding, G.J. 2002. Lidar remote sensing for ecosystem
studies. – BioScience 52: 19-30.10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0019:LRSFES]2.0.CO;2]Search in Google Scholar
[
Legendre, P. 1993. Spatial autocorrelation: trouble or new paradigm? – Ecology 74: 1659-
1673.10.2307/1939924]Search in Google Scholar
[
Legendre, P. & Fortin, M.-J. 1989. Spatial pattern and ecological analysis. – Vegetatio, 80: 107-
138.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Legendre, P. & Legendre, L. 1998. Numerical ecology, ed. – 2. Elsevier, Amsterdam.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lehmann, A., Overton, J.M. & Leathwich, J.R. 2002. GRASP: generalized regression analysis and
spatial prediction. – Ecol. Modelling 157: 189-207.10.1016/S0304-3800(02)00195-3]Search in Google Scholar
[
Leibold, M.A. 1995. The niche concept revisited: mechanistic models and community context.
– Ecology 76: 1371-1382.10.2307/1938141]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lennartsson, T. & Svensson, R. 1996. Patterns in the decline of three species of Gentianella (Gentianaceae)
in Sweden, illustrating the deterioration of semi-natural grasslands. – Symb.
bot. upsal. 31: 3: 170-184.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Leuschner, C., Köckemann, B. & Buschmann, H. 2009. Abundance, niche breadth, and niche
occupation of Central European tree species in the centre and at the margin of their distribution
range. – For. Ecol. Mgmt 258: 1248-1259.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lobo, J.M. 2008. More complex distribution models or more representative data? – Biodiv.
Inform. 5: 14-19.10.17161/bi.v5i0.40]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lobo, J.M., Jiménez-Valverde, A. & Hortal, J. 2010. The uncertain nature of absences and their
importance in species distribution modelling. – Ecography 33: 103-114.10.1111/j.1600-0587.2009.06039.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lobo, J.M., Jiménez-Valverde, A. & Real, R. 2008. AUC: a misleading measure of the performance
of predictive distribution models. – Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 17: 145-151.10.1111/j.1466-8238.2007.00358.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Loiselle, B.A., Jørgensen, P.M., Consiglio, T., Jiménez, I., Blake, J.G., Lohmann, L.G. & Montiel, O.M.
2008. Predicting species distributions from herbarium collections: does climate bias in
collection sampling influence model outcomes? – J. Biogeogr. 35: 105-116.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lomba, A., Pellissier, L., Randin, C., Vicente, J., Moreira, F., Honrado, J. & Guisan, A. 2010. Overcoming
the rare species modelling paradox: a novel hierarchical framework applied to
an Iberian endemic plant. – Biol. Conserv. 143: 2647-2657.10.1016/j.biocon.2010.07.007]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lozier, J.D., Aniello, P. & Hickerson, M.J. 2009. Predicting the distribution of Sasquatch in western
North America: anything goes with ecological niche modelling. – J. Biogeogr. 36: 1623-
1627.10.1111/j.1365-2699.2009.02152.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lundberg, A. 1987. Sand dune vegetation on Karmøy, SW Norway. – Nord. J. Bot. 7: 453-477.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Luoto, M., Heikkinen, R.K. & Carter, T.R. 2004. Loss of palsa mires in Europe and biological consequences.
– Environm. Conserv. 31: 30-37.10.1017/S0376892904001018]Search in Google Scholar
[
Luoto, M., Heikkinen, R.K., Pöyry, J. & Saarinen, K. 2006. Determinants of biogeographical distribution
of butterflies in boreal regions. – J. Biogeogr. 33: 1764-1778.10.1111/j.1365-2699.2005.01395.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Luoto, M. & Hjort, J. 2006. Scale matters – a multi-resolution study of the determinants of patterned
ground activity in subarctic Finland. – Geomorphology 80: 282-294.10.1016/j.geomorph.2006.03.001]Search in Google Scholar
[
Luoto, M., Kuusaari, M., Rita, H., Salminen, J. & von Bonsdorff, T. 2001. Determinants of distribution
and abundance in the clouded apollo butterfly: a landscape ecological approach.
– Ecography 24: 601-617.10.1034/j.1600-0587.2001.d01-215.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Luoto, M. & Seppälä, M. 2002. Modelling the distribution of palsas in Finnish Lapland with
logistic regression and GIS. – Permafr. periglac. Proc. 13: 17-28.10.1002/ppp.404]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lütolf, M., Kienast, F. & Guisan, A. 2006. The ghost of past species occurrence: improving species
distribution models for presence-only data. – J. appl. Ecol. 43: 802-815.10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01191.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
McAlister, S. 1997. Cryptogam communities on fallen logs in the Duke Forest, North Carolina.
– J. Veg. Sci. 8: 115-124.]Search in Google Scholar
[
McCarthy, K.P., Fletcher, R.J.J., Rota, C.T. & Hutto, R.L. 2011. Predicting species distributions from
samples collected along roadsides. – Conserv. Biol. 26: 68-77.10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01754.x22010858]Search in Google Scholar
[
McCune, B. 1997. Influence of noisy environmental data on canonical correspondence analysis.
– Ecology 78: 2617-2623.10.1890/0012-9658(1997)078[2617:IONEDO]2.0.CO;2]Search in Google Scholar
[
McCune, B. & Grace, J.B. 2002. Analysis of ecological communities. – MjM Software Design,
Gleneden Beach, Oregon.]Search in Google Scholar
[
McGowan, S., Leavitt, P.R., Hall, R.I., Anderson, N.J., Jeppesen, E. & Odgaard, B.V. 2005. Controls
of algal abundance and community composition during ecosystem state change. – Ecology
86: 2200-2211.10.1890/04-1029]Search in Google Scholar
[
McIntosh, R.P. 1967. The continuum concept of vegetation. – Bot. Rev. 33: 130-187.10.1007/BF02858667]Search in Google Scholar
[
McIntosh, R.P. 1985. The background of ecology. – Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Mack, R.N., Simberloff, D., Lonsdale, W.M., Evans, H., Clout, M. & Bazzaz, F.A. 2000. Biotic invasions:
causes, epidemiology, global consequences, and control. – Ecol. Appl. 10: 689-710.10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[0689:BICEGC]2.0.CO;2]Search in Google Scholar
[
MacKenzie, D.I., Nichols, J.D., Sutton, N., Kawanishi, K. & Bailey, L.L. 2005. Improving inferences
in population studies of rare species that are detected imperfectly. – Ecology 86: 1101-
1113.10.1890/04-1060]Search in Google Scholar
[
Mackey, B.G. & Lindenmayer, D.B. 2001. Towards a hierarchical framework for modelling the
spatial distribution of animals. – J. Biogeogr. 28: 1147-1166.10.1046/j.1365-2699.2001.00626.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
McPherson, J.M. & Jetz, W. 2007. Effects of species’ ecology on the accuracy of distribution
models. – Ecography 30: 135-151.10.1111/j.2006.0906-7590.04823.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Makarenkov, V. & Legendre, P. 2002. Nonlinear redundancy analysis and canonical correspondence
analysis based on polynomial regression. – Ecology, 83: 1146-1161.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Mallik, A.U. & Pellissier, F. 2000. Effects of Vaccinium myrtillus on spruce regeneration: testing
the notion of coevolutionary significance of allelopathy. – J. chem. Ecol. 26: 2197-2209.10.1023/A:1005528701927]Search in Google Scholar
[
Malmer, N. 1962. Studies on mire vegetation in the Archaean area of Southwestern Götaland
(South Sweden). I. Vegetation and habitat conditions on the Åkhult mire. – Opera bot. 7:
1: 1-322.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Marage, D., Garraud, L. & Rameau, J.-C. 2008. The influence of management history on spatial
prediction of Eryngium spinalba, an endangered endemic species. – Appl. Veg. Sci. 11:
139-148.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Marino, J., Bennett, M., Cossios, D., Iriarte, A., Lucherini, M., Pliscoff, P., Sillero-Zubiri, C., Villalba,
L. & Walker, S. 2011. Bioclimatic constraints to Andean cat distribution: a modelling application
for rare species. – Divers. Distrib. 17: 311-322.10.1111/j.1472-4642.2011.00744.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Marmion, M., Luoto, M., Heikkinen, R.K. & Thuiller, W. 2009a. The performance of state-of-the-art
modelling techniques depends on geographical distribution of species. – Ecol. Modelling
220: 3512-3520.10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2008.10.019]Search in Google Scholar
[
Marmion, M., Parviainen, N., Luoto, M., Heikkinen, R.K. & Thuiller, W. 2009b. Evaluation of consensus
methods in predictive species distribution modelling. – Divers. Distrib. 15: 59-69.10.1111/j.1472-4642.2008.00491.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Mateo, R.G., Croat, T.B., Felicísimo, Á.M. & Muñoz, J. 2010. Profile or group discriminative techniques?
Generating reliable species distribution models using pseudo-absences and
target-group absences from natural history collections. – Divers. Distrib. 16: 84-94.10.1111/j.1472-4642.2009.00617.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Mathiassen, G. & Økland, R.H. 2007. Relative importance of host tree species and environmental
gradients for epiphytic species composition, exemplified by pyrenomycetes s. lat. (Ascomycota)
on Salix in central north Scandinavia. – Ecography 30: 251-263.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Meier, E.S., Kienast, F., Pearman, P.B., Svenning, J.-C., Thuiller, W., Araújo, M.B., Guisan, A. & Zimmermann,
N.E. 2010. Biotic and abiotic variables show little redundancy in explaining
tree species distributions. – Ecography 33: 1038-1048.10.1111/j.1600-0587.2010.06229.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Mellert, K.H., Fensterer, V., Küchenhoff, H., Reger, B., Kölling, C., Klemmt, H.J. & Ewald, J. 2011.
Hypothesis-driven species distribution models for tree species in the Bavarian Alps. – J.
Veg. Sci. 22: 635-646.10.1111/j.1654-1103.2011.01274.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Merckx, B., Steyaert, M., Vanreusel, A., Vincx, M. & Vanaverbeke, J. 2011. Null models reveal
preferential sampling, spatial autocorrelation and overfitting in habitat suitability modelling.
– Ecol. Modelling 222: 588-597.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Metsävainio, K. 1931. Untersuchungen über das Wurzelsystem der Moorpflanzen. – Annls bot.
Soc. zool.-bot. fenn. Vanamo 1: 1-422.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Metzger, M.J., Bunce, R.G.H., Jongman, R.H.G., Mücher, C.A. & Watkins, J.W. 2005. A climatic stratification
of the environment of Europe. – Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 14: 549-563.10.1111/j.1466-822X.2005.00190.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Michel, P., Overton, J.M., Mason, N.W.H., Hurst, J.M. & Lee, W.G. 2011. Species-environment relationships
of mosses in New Zealand indigenous forest and shrubland ecosystems. – Pl.
Ecol. 212: 353-367.10.1007/s11258-010-9827-5]Search in Google Scholar
[
Miller, J. & Franklin, J. 2002. Modeling the distribution of four vegetation alliances using generalized
linear models and classification trees with spatial dependence. – Ecol. Modelling
157: 227-247.10.1016/S0304-3800(02)00196-5]Search in Google Scholar
[
Miller, J.R., Dixon, M.D. & Turner, M.G. 2004. Response of avian communities in large-river floodplains
to environmental variation at multiple scales. – Ecol. Appl. 14: 1394-1410.10.1890/02-5376]Search in Google Scholar
[
Minchin, P.R. 1987. Simulation of multidimensional community patterns: towards a comprehensive
model. – Vegetatio 71: 145-156.10.1007/BF00039167]Search in Google Scholar
[
Minchin, P.R. 1989. Montane vegetation of the Mt. Field massif, Tasmania: a test of some hypotheses
about properties of community patterns. – Vegetatio 83: 97-110.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Mitchell, G. & Arthur, W. 1998. Population interactions in primary succession: an example of
contramensalism involving rock-colonizing bryophytes. – Lindbergia 23: 81-85.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Mitchell, M.G.E., Cahill, J.F.J. & Hik, D.S. 2009. Plant interactions are unimportant in a subarctic–
alpine plant community. – Ecology 90: 2360-2367.10.1890/08-0924.119769114]Search in Google Scholar
[
Mithen, R., Harper, J.L. & Weiner, J. 1984. Growth and mortality of individual plants as a function
of ‚available area‘. – Oecologia 62: 57-60.10.1007/BF0037737328310738]Search in Google Scholar
[
Moen, A. 1987. The regional vegetation of Norway; that of Central Norway in particular. – Norsk
geogr. Tidsskr. 41: 179-226.10.1080/00291958708552180]Search in Google Scholar
[
Moen, A. 1999. National atlas of Norway: vegetation. – Norwegian Mapping Authority, Hønefoss.
Moore, I.D., Grayson, R.B. & Ladson, A.R. 1991. Digital terrain modeling: a review of hydrological,
geomorphological, and biological applications. – Hydrol. Proces. 5: 3-30.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Moore, K.A. 2009. Fluctuating patch boundaries in a native annual forb: the roles of niche and
dispersal limitation. – Ecology 90: 378-387.10.1890/07-1753.119323222]Search in Google Scholar
[
Murphy, H.T. & Lovett-Doust, J. 2007. Accounting for regional niche variation in habitat suitability
models. – Oikos 116: 99-110.10.1111/j.2006.0030-1299.15050.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Murphy, P.N.C., Ogilvie, J., Meng, F.-R., White, B., Bhatti, J.S. & Arp, P.A. 2011. Modelling and
mapping topographic variations in forest soils at high resolution: a case study. – Ecol.
Modelling 222: 2314-2332.10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.01.003]Search in Google Scholar
[
Murray, B.G.J. 2000. Universal laws and predictive theory in ecology and evolution. – Oikos 89:
403-408.10.1034/j.1600-0706.2000.890223.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Murray, B.G.J. 2001. Are ecological and evolutionary theories scientific? – Biol. Rev. Camb. phil.
Soc. 76: 255-289.10.1017/S146479310100567X11396849]Search in Google Scholar
[
Myklestad, Å. 1993. The distribution of Salix species in Fennoscandia – a numerical analysis. –
Ecography 16: 329-344.10.1111/j.1600-0587.1993.tb00222.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Nathan, R., Schurr, F.M., Spiegel, O., Steinitz, O., Trakhtenbrot, A. & Tsoar, A. 2008. Mechanisms
of long-distance seed dispersal. – Trends Ecol. Evol. 23: 638-647.10.1016/j.tree.2008.08.00318823680]Search in Google Scholar
[
Nekola, J.C. & White, P.S. 1999. The distance decay of similarity in biogeography and ecology. – J.
Biogeogr. 26: 867-878.10.1046/j.1365-2699.1999.00305.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Nenzén, H.K. & Araújo, M.B. 2011. Choice of threshold alters projections of species range shifts
under climate change. – Ecol. Modelling 222: 3346-3354.10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.07.011]Search in Google Scholar
[
Newbold, T., Reader, T., El-Gabbas, A., Berg, W., Shohdi, W.M., Zalat, S., El Din, S.B. & Gilbert, F.
2010. Testing the accuracy of species distribution models using species records from a
new field survey. – Oikos 119: 1326-1334.10.1111/j.1600-0706.2009.18295.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Niamir, A., Skidmore, A.K., Toxopeus, A.G., Muñoz, A.R. & Real, R. 2011. Finessing atlas data for
species distribution models. – Divers. Distrib. 17: 1173-1185.10.1111/j.1472-4642.2011.00793.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Niemelä, J., Ranta, E. & Haila, Y. 1985. Carabid beetles in lush forest patches on the Åland Islands,
south-west Finland: an island-mainland comparison. – J. Biogeogr. 12: 109-120.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Nilsson, M.-C. 1994. Separation of allelopathy and resource competition by the boreal dwarf
shrub Empetrum hermaphroditum Hagerup. – Oecologia 98: 1-7.10.1007/BF00326083]Search in Google Scholar
[
Nilsson, M.-C. & Zackrisson, O. 1992. Inhibition of scots pine seedling establishment by Empetrum
hermaphroditum. – J. chem. Ecol. 18: 1857-1870.10.1007/BF02751109]Search in Google Scholar
[
Norderhaug, A., Ihse, M. & Pedersen, O. 2000. Biotope patterns and abundance of meadow plant
species in a Norwegian rural landscape. – Landsc. Ecol. 15: 201-218.10.1023/A:1008141400166]Search in Google Scholar
[
Nordhagen, R. 1920. Om nomenklatur og begrepsdannelse i plantesociologien. – Nyt Mag.
Naturvid. 57: 17-128.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Nordhagen, R. 1928. Die Vegetation und Flora des Sylenegebietes. – Skr. norske Vidensk.-Akad.
Oslo mat.-naturvid. Klasse 1927: 1: 1-612.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Nordhagen, R. 1943. Sikilsdalen og Norges fjellbeiter. – Bergens Mus. Skr. 22: 1-607]Search in Google Scholar
[
Noss, R.F. 1990. Indicators for monitoring biodiversity: a hierarchical approach. – Conserv. Biol.
4: 355-364.10.1111/j.1523-1739.1990.tb00309.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Noss, R.F. 1996. The naturalists are dying off. – Conserv. Biol. 10: 1-3.10.1046/j.1523-1739.1996.10010001.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Nygaard, P.H. & Ødegaard, T. 1999. Sixty years of vegetation dynamics in a south boreal coniferous forest in southern Norway. – J. Veg. Sci. 10: 5-16.10.2307/3237155]Search in Google Scholar
[
Næsset, E. & Økland, T. 2002. Estimating tree height and crown properties using airborne scanning
laser in a boreal nature reserve. – Remote Sensing Environm. 79: 105-115.10.1016/S0034-4257(01)00243-7]Search in Google Scholar
[
Odell, G. & Ståhl, G. 1998. Vegetationsförändringar i skogsmark från 1980-talet till 1990-talet
- resultat från den landsomfattande Ståndortskarteringen. – Svensk bot. Tidskr. 92: 227-
232.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Odland, A. 2009. Interpretation of altitudinal gradients in South Central Norway based on vascular
plants as environmental indicators. – Ecol. Indic. 9: 409-421.10.1016/j.ecolind.2008.05.012]Search in Google Scholar
[
Odland, A. 2011. Estimation of the growing season length in alpine areas: effects of snow and
temperatures. – In: Schmidt, J.G. (ed.), Alpine environment: geology, ecology and conservation,
Nova Science Publs, Happage, NY, pp. 85-134.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Odland, A. & Munkejord, H.K. 2008. Plants as indicators of snow layer duration in southern
Norwegian mountains. – Ecol. Indic. 8: 57-68.10.1016/j.ecolind.2006.12.005]Search in Google Scholar
[
Öckinger, E. & Nilsson, S.G. 2010. Local population extinction and vitality of an epiphytic lichen
in fragmented old-growth forest. – Ecology 91: 2100-2109.10.1890/09-1421.120715632]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H. 1986a. Rescaling of ecological gradients. II. The effect of scale on symmetry of
species response curves. – Nord. J. Bot. 6: 661-670.10.1111/j.1756-1051.1986.tb00465.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H. 1986b. Rescaling of ecological gradients. III. The effect of scale on niche breadth
measurements. – Nord. J. Bot. 6: 671-677.10.1111/j.1756-1051.1986.tb00466.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H. 1989a. Hydromorphology and phytogeography of mires in inner Østfold and adjacent
part of Akershus, SE Norway, in relation to regional variation in SE Fennoscandian
mires. – Opera bot. 96: 1-122.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H. 1989b. A phytoecological study of the mire Northern Kisselbergmosen, SE Norway.
I. Introduction, flora, vegetation and ecological conditions. – Sommerfeltia 8: 1-172.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H. 1990a. Vegetation ecology: theory, methods and applications with reference to
Fennoscandia. – Sommerfeltia Suppl. 1: 1-233.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H. 1990b. A phytoecological study of the mire Northern Kisselbergmosen, SE Norway.
II. Identification of gradients by detrended (canonical) correspondence analysis. – Nord.
J. Bot. 10: 79-108.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H. 1990c. A phytoecological study of the mire Northern Kisselbergmosen, SE Norway.
III. Diversity and habitat niche relationships. – Nord. J. Bot. 10: 191-220.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H. 1990d. Regional variation in SE Fennoscandian mire vegetation. – Nord. J. Bot. 10:
285-310.10.1111/j.1756-1051.1990.tb01774.x719233432834195]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H. 1992. Studies in SE Fennoscandian mires: relevance to ecological theory. – J. Veg.
Sci. 3: 279-284.10.2307/3235693]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H. 1995. Population biology of the clonal moss Hylocomium splendens in Norwegian
boreal spruce forests. I. Demography. – J. Ecol. 83: 697-712.10.2307/2261637]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H. 1996. Are ordination and constrained ordination alternative or complementary
strategies in general ecological studies? – J. Veg. Sci. 7: 289-292.10.2307/3236330]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H. 1999. On the variation explained by ordination and constrained ordination axes.
– J. Veg. Sci. 10: 131-136.10.2307/3237168]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H. 2000. Population biology of the clonal moss Hylocomium splendens in Norwegian
boreal spruce forests. 5. Consequences of the vertical position of individual shoot segments.
– Oikos 88: 449-469.10.1034/j.1600-0706.2000.880301.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H. 2003. Partitioning the variation in a plot-by-species data matrix that is related to
n sets of explanatory variables. – J. Veg. Sci. 14: 693-700.10.1111/j.1654-1103.2003.tb02201.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H. 2007. Wise use of statistical tools in ecological field studies. – Folia geobot. 42:
123-140.10.1007/BF02893879]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H. & Bakkestuen, V. 2004. Fine-scale spatial patterns in populations of the clonal moss Hylocomium splendens partly reflect structuring processes in the boreal forest
floor. – Oikos 106: 565-575.10.1111/j.0030-1299.2004.12574.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H. & Bendiksen, E. 1985. The vegetation of the forest-alpine transition in the Grunningsdalen
area, Telemark, SE Norway. – Sommerfeltia 2: 1-224.10.2478/som-1985-0002]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H., Bratli, H., Dramstad, W.E., Edvardsen, A., Engan, G., Fjellstad, W., Heegaard, E.,
Pedersen, O. & Solstad, H. 2006. Scale-dependent importance of environment, land use
and landscape structure for species richness and composition of SE Norwegian modern
agricultural landscapes. – Landsc. Ecol. 21: 969-987.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H. & Eilertsen, O. 1993. Vegetation-environment relationships of boreal coniferous
forests in the Solhomfjell area, Gjerstad, S Norway. – Sommerfeltia 16: 1-254.10.2478/som-1993-0002]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H. & Eilertsen, O. 1994. Canonical correspondence analysis with variation partitioning:
some comments and an application. – J. Veg. Sci. 5: 117-126.10.2307/3235645]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H., Eilertsen, O. & Økland, T. 1990. On the relationship between sample plot size and
beta diversity in boreal coniferous forests. – Vegetatio 87: 187-192.10.1007/BF00042954]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H., Rydgren, K. & Økland, T. 2003. Plant species composition of boreal spruce swamp
forests: closed doors and windows of opportunity. – Ecology 84: 1909-1919.10.1890/0012-9658(2003)084[1909:PSCOBS]2.0.CO;2]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H., Rydgren, K. & Økland, T. 2008. Species richness in boreal swamp forests of SE
Norway: the role of surface microtopography. – J. Veg. Sci. 19: 67-74.10.3170/2007-8-18330]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, R.H., Økland, T. & Rydgren, K. 2001. Vegetation-environment relationships of boreal
spruce swamp forests in Østmarka Nature Reserve, SE Norway. – Sommerfeltia 29:
1-190.10.2478/som-2001-0001]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, T. 1988. An ecological approach to the investigation of a beech forest in Vestfold, SE
Norway. – Nord. J. Bot. 8: 375-407.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, T. 1996. Vegetation-environment relationships of boreal spruce forest in ten monitoring
reference areas in Norway. – Sommerfeltia 22: 1-349.10.2478/som-1996-0001]Search in Google Scholar
[
Økland, T., Rydgren, K., Økland, R.H., Storaunet, K.O. & Rolstad, J. 2003. Variation in environmental
conditions, understorey species richness, abundance and composition among natural and
managed Picea abies forest stands. – For. Ecol. Mgmt 177: 17-37.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Östlund, L., Zackrisson, O. & Axelsson, A.L. 1997. The history and transformation of a Scandinavian
boreal forest landscape since the 19th century. – Can. J. For. Res. 27: 1198-1206.10.1139/x97-070]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ohlson, M. & Økland, R.H. 1998. Spatial variation in rates of carbon and nitrogen accumulation
in a boreal bog. – Ecology 79: 2745-2758.10.1890/0012-9658(1998)079[2745:SVIROC]2.0.CO;2]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ohlson, M., Økland, R.H., Nordbakken, J.-F. & Dahlberg, B. 2001. Fatal interactions between Scots
pine and Sphagnum mosses in bog ecosystems. – Oikos 94: 425-432.10.1034/j.1600-0706.2001.940305.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Oksanen, J. 1996. Is the humped relationship between species richness and biomass an artefact
due to plot size? – J. Ecol. 84: 293-295.10.2307/2261364]Search in Google Scholar
[
Oksanen, J. 1997. Why the beta-function cannot be used to estimate skewness of species responses.
– J. Veg. Sci. 8: 147-152.10.2307/3237252]Search in Google Scholar
[
Oksanen, J. & Minchin, P.R. 2002. Continuum theory revisited: what shape are species responses
along ecological gradients? – Ecol. Modelling 157: 119-129.10.1016/S0304-3800(02)00190-4]Search in Google Scholar
[
Oksanen, J. & Tonteri, T. 1995. Rate of compositional turnover along gradients and total gradient
length. – J. Veg. Sci. 6: 815-824.10.2307/3236395]Search in Google Scholar
[
Olea, P.P. & Mateo-Tomás, P. 2011. Spatially explicit estimation of occupancy, detection probability
and survey effort needed to inform conservation planning. – Divers. Distrib. 17:
714-724.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Oostermeijer, J.G.B., Luijten, S.H., Ellis-Adam, A.C. & den Nijs, J.C.M. 2002. Future prospects for
the rare, late-flowering Gentianella germanica and Gentianopsis ciliata in Dutch nutrientpoor
calcareous grasslands. – Biol. Conserv. 104: 339-350.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Openshaw, S. & Taylor, P.J. 1979. A million or so correlation coefficients: three experiments on the modifiable areal unit problem. – In: Wrigley, N. (ed.), Statistical applications in the
spatial sciences, Pion, London, pp. 127-144.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Oreskes, N., Schrader-Frechette, K. & Belitz, K. 1994. Verification, validation, and confirmation
of numerical models in the earth sciences. – Science 263: 641-646.]Search in Google Scholar
[
O‘Sullivan, D. & Unwin, D.J. 2003. Geographic information analysis. –Wiley, Hoboken.
Palmer, M.W. 1993. Putting things in even better order: the advantages of canonical correspondence
analysis. – Ecology 74: 2215-2230.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Parker, K.C. 1988. Environmental relationships and vegetation associates of columnar cacti in
the northern Sonoran Desert. – Vegetatio 78: 125-140.10.1007/BF00033422]Search in Google Scholar
[
Parolo, G., Rossi, G. & Ferrarini, A. 2008. Toward improved species niche modelling: Arnica
montana in the Alps as a case study. – J. appl. Ecol. 45: 1410-1418.10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01516.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Parviainen, M., Luoto, M., Ryttäri, T. & Heikkinen, R.K. 2008. Modelling the occurrence of threatened
plant species in taiga landscapes: methodological and ecological perspectives. – J.
Biogeogr. 35: 1888-1905.10.1111/j.1365-2699.2008.01922.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pearce, J.L. & Boyce, M.S. 2006. Modelling distribution and abundance with presence-only data.
– J. appl. Ecol. 43: 405-412.10.1111/j.1365-2664.2005.01112.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pearce, J. & Ferrier, S. 2000a. An evaluation of alternative algorithms for fitting species distribution
models using logistic regression. – Ecol. Modelling 128: 127-147.10.1016/S0304-3800(99)00227-6]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pearce, J. & Ferrier, S. 2000b. Evaluating the predictive performance of habitat models developed
using logistic regression. – Ecol. Modelling 133: 225-245.10.1016/S0304-3800(00)00322-7]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pearman, P.B., Guisan, A., Broennimann, O. & Randin, C.F. 2007. Niche dynamics in time and
space. – Trends Ecol. Evol. 23: 149-158.10.1016/j.tree.2007.11.00518289716]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pearman, P.B., Guisan, A. & Zimmermann, N.E. 2011. Impacts of climate change on Swiss biodiversity:
an indicator taxa approach. – Biol. Conserv. 144: 866-875.10.1016/j.biocon.2010.11.020]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pearson, R.G. & Dawson, T.P. 2003. Predicting the impacts of climate change on the distribution
of species: are bioclimate envelope models useful? – Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 12: 361-371.10.1046/j.1466-822X.2003.00042.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pearson, R.G., Dawson, T.P. & Liu, C. 2004. Modelling species distributions in Britain: a hierarchical
integration of climate and land-cover data. – Ecography 27: 285-298.10.1111/j.0906-7590.2004.03740.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pedersen, B. 1990. Distributional patterns of vascular plants in Fennoscandia: a numerical approach.
– Nord. J. Bot. 10: 163-189.10.1111/j.1756-1051.1990.tb01765.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pedersen, O. 2009. Strandplanter på vandring – om nye, langdistansespredte havstrandplanter,
spesielt på Lista. – Blyttia 67: 75-94.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pellerin, S., Mercure, M., Desulniers, A.S. & Lavoie, C. 2008. Changes in plant communities over
three decades on two disturbed bogs in southeastern Québec. – Appl. Veg. Sci. 11: 107-
118.10.1111/j.1654-109X.2009.01008.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pentecost, A. & Zhang, Z. 2006. Response of bryophytes to exposure and water availability on
some European travertines. – J. Bryol. 28: 21-26.10.1179/174328206X90431]Search in Google Scholar
[
Peper, J., Jansen, F., Pietzsch, D. & Manthey, M. 2011. Patterns of plant species turnover along
grazing gradients. – J. Veg. Sci. 22: 457-466.10.1111/j.1654-1103.2011.01260.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Peters, J., Verhoest, N.E.C., Samson, R., van Meirvenne, M., Cockx, L. & de Baets, B. 2009. Uncertainty
propagation in vegetation distribution models based on ensemble classifiers. – Ecol.
Modelling 220: 791-804.10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2008.12.022]Search in Google Scholar
[
Peterson, A.T. 2003. Predicting the geography of species’ invasions via ecological niche modeling.
– Q. Rev. Biol. 78: 419-433.10.1086/378926]Search in Google Scholar
[
Peterson, A.T. 2006. Uses and requirements of ecological niche models and related distributional
models. – Biodivers. Inf. 3: 59-72.10.17161/bi.v3i0.29]Search in Google Scholar
[
Peterson, A.T., Knapp, S., Guralnick, R., Soberón, J. & Holder, M.T. 2010. The big questions for
biodiversity informatics. – Syst. Biodivers. 8: 159-168.10.1080/14772001003739369]Search in Google Scholar
[
Peterson, A.T., Papes, M. & Eaton, M. 2007. Transferability and model evaluation in ecological niche modeling: a comparison of GARP and Maxent. – Ecography 30: 550-560.
Peterson, A.T., Soberón, J., Pearson, R.G., Anderson, R.P., Martínez-Meyer, E., Nakamura, M. &
Araújo, M.B. 2011. Ecological niches and geographic distributions. – Monogr. Pop. Biol.
49: 1-314.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Phillips, S.J. 2011. A brief tutorial on Maxent. – AT&T Research, Princeton, NJ.
Phillips, S.J., Anderson, R.P. & Schapire, R.E. 2006. Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic
distributions. – Ecol. Modelling 190: 231-259.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Phillips, S.J. & Dudík, M. 2008. Modeling of species distributions with Maxent: new extensions
and a comprehensive evaluation. – Ecography 31: 161-175.10.1111/j.0906-7590.2008.5203.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Phillips, S.J., Dudík, M., Elith, J., Graham, C.H., Lehmann, A., Leathwich, J.R. & Ferrier, S. 2009.
Sample selection bias and presence-only distribution models: implications for background
and pseudo-absence data. – Ecol. Appl. 19: 181-197.10.1890/07-2153.1]Search in Google Scholar
[
Phillips, S.J. & Elith, J. 2011. Logistic methods for resource selection functions and presence-only
species distribution models. – Proc. AAAI Conf. artif. Intell. 21: 1384-1389.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pickett, S.T.A. & Thompson, J.N. 1978. Patch dynamics and the design of nature reserves. – Biol.
Conserv. 13: 27-37.10.1016/0006-3207(78)90016-2]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pigott, C.D. & Huntley, J.P. 1978. Factors controlling the distribution of Tilia cordata at the
northern limits of its geographical range. I. Distribution in North-west England. – New
Phytol. 81: 429-441.10.1111/j.1469-8137.1978.tb02648.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pigott, C.D. & Huntley, J.P. 1980. Factors controlling the distribution of Tilia cordata at the
northern limits of its geographical range. II. History in north-west England. – New Phytol.
84: 145-164.10.1111/j.1469-8137.1980.tb00757.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pigott, C.D. & Huntley, J.P. 1981. Factors controlling the distribution of Tilia cordata at the
northern limits of its geographical range. III. Nature and causes of seed sterility. – New
Phytol. 87: 817-839.10.1111/j.1469-8137.1981.tb01716.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pimm, S.L. 1984. The complexity and stability of ecosystems. – Nature 307: 321-326.10.1038/307321a0]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pineda, E. & Lobo, J.M. 2009. Assessing the accuracy of species distribution models to predict
amphibian species richness patterns. – J. anim. Ecol. 78: 182-190.10.1111/j.1365-2656.2008.01471.x18771504]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pinel-Alloul, B., Niyonsenga, T. & Legendre, P. 1995. Spatial and environmental components of
freshwater zooplankton structure. – Écoscience 2: 1-19.10.1080/11956860.1995.11682263]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pinheiro, J.C. & Bates, D.M. 2000. Mixed-effects models in S and S-PLUS. – Springer, New York.
Platts, P.J., Ahrends, A., Gereau, R.E., McClean, C.J., Lovett, J.C., Marshall, A.R., Pellikka, P.K.E.,
Mulligan, M., Fanning, E. & Marchant, R. 2010. Can distribution models help refine inventory-
based estimates of conservation priority? A case study in the Eastern Arc forests of
Tanzania and Kenya. – Divers. Distrib. 16: 628-642.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Poore, M.E.D. 1956. The use of phytosociological methods in ecological investigations. IV. General
discussion of phytosociological problems. – J. Ecol. 44: 28-50.10.2307/2257153]Search in Google Scholar
[
Popper, K.R. 1959. The logic of scientific discovery. – Hutchinson, London.
Popper, K.R. 1989. Conjectures and refutations: the growth of scientific knowledge, ed. 5. –
Routledge, London.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Porter, W.P. & Gates, D.M. 1969. Thermodynamic equilibria of animals with environment. – Ecol.
Monogr. 39: 227-244.10.2307/1948545]Search in Google Scholar
[
Porter, W.P., Mitchell, J.W., Beckman, W.A. & DeWitt, C.B. 1973. Behavioral implications of
mechanistic ecology: thermal and behavioral modeling of desert ectotherms and their
microenvironment. Oecologia 13: 1-54.10.1007/BF0037961728307981]Search in Google Scholar
[
Potthoff, K. 2007. Persistence of alpine grass-dominated vegetation on abandoned mountain
summer farms in Western Norway. – Norsk geogr. Tidsskr. 61: 192-206.10.1080/00291950701709283]Search in Google Scholar
[
Preston, C.D., Harrower, C.A. & Hill, M.O. 2011. Distribution patterns in British and Irish liverworts
and hornworts. – J. Bryol. 33: 3-16.10.1179/1743282010Y.0000000001]Search in Google Scholar
[
Preston, F.W. 1948. The commonness, and rarity, of species. – Ecology 29: 254-283.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Price, E.A.C. & Hutchings, M.J. 1992. The causes and developmental effects of integration and
independence between different parts of Glechoma hederacea clones. – Oikos 63: 376-
386.10.2307/3544963]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pulliam, H.R. 1988. Sources, sinks, and population regulation. – Am. Nat. 132: 652-661.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pulliam, H.R. 2000. On the relationship between niche and distribution. – Ecol. Letters 3: 349-
361.10.1046/j.1461-0248.2000.00143.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Qian, H., Fridley, J.D. & Palmer, M.W. 2007. The latitudinal gradient of species-area relationships
for vascular plants of North America. – Am. Nat. 170: 690-701.10.1086/52196017926291]Search in Google Scholar
[
Qian, H., Klinka, K., Økland, R.H., Krestov, P. & Kayahara, G.J. 2003. Understorey vegetation in
boreal Picea mariana and Populus tremuloides stands in British Columbia. – J. Veg. Sci.
14: 173-184.10.1111/j.1654-1103.2003.tb02142.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Qian, H. & Riclefs, R.E. 2000. Large-scale processes and the Asian bias in species diversity of
temperate plants. – Nature 407: 180-182.10.1038/3502505211001054]Search in Google Scholar
[
Raatikainen, K.M., Heikkinen, R.K. & Pykälä, J. 2007. Impacts of local and regional factors on
vegetation of boreal semi-natural grasslands. – Pl. Ecol. 189: 155-174.10.1007/s11258-006-9172-x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Raes, N. & ter Steege, H. 2007. A null-model for significance testing of presence-only species
distribution models. – Ecography 30: 727-736.10.1111/j.2007.0906-7590.05041.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ramberg, I.B., Bryhni, I., Nøttvedt, A. (eds.) 2007. Landet blir til. Norges geologi, ed. 2. – Norsk
geologisk forening, Trondheim.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Randin, C.F., Dirnböck, T., Dullinger, S., Zimmermann, N.E., Zappa, M. & Guisan, A. 2006. Are nichebased
species distribution models transferable in space? – J. Biogeogr. 33: 1689-1703.10.1111/j.1365-2699.2006.01466.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Randin, C.F., Jaccard, H., Vittoz, P., Yoccoz, N.G. & Guisan, A. 2009a. Land use improves spatial
predictions of mountain plant abundance but not presence-absence. – J. Veg. Sci. 20:
996-1008.10.1111/j.1654-1103.2009.01098.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Randin, C.F., Vuissoz, G., Liston, G.E., Vittoz, P. & Guisan, A. 2009b. Introduction of snow and
geomorphic disturbance variables into predictive models of alpine plant distribution in
the Western Swiss Alps. – Arct. alp. Res. 41: 347-361.10.1657/1938-4246-41.3.347]Search in Google Scholar
[
Reinhart, K.O., Gurnee, J., Tirado, R. & Callaway, R.M. 2006. Invasion through quantitative effects:
intense shade drives native decline and invasive success. – Ecol. Appl. 16: 1821-1831.10.1890/1051-0761(2006)016[1821:ITQEIS]2.0.CO;2]Search in Google Scholar
[
Resvoll, T.R. 1917. Om planter som passer til kort og kold sommer. – Arch. Math. Naturvid. 35:
1-224.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Richardson, D.M. & Whittaker, R.J. 2010. Conservation biogeography - foundations, concepts
and challenges. – Divers. Distrib. 16: 313-320.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ricklefs, R.E. 1973. Ecology. – Chiron, Newton.10.2307/1442968]Search in Google Scholar
[
Riclefs, R.E. 2007. History and diversity: explorations at the intersection of ecology and evolution.
– Am. Nat. 170: S56-S70.10.1086/519402]Search in Google Scholar
[
Riclefs, R.E. 2011. A biogeographical perspective on ecological systems: some personal reflections.
– J. Biogeogr. 38: 2045-2056.10.1111/j.1365-2699.2011.02520.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Riordan, E.C. & Rundel, P.W. 2009. Modelling the distribution of a threatened habitat: the California
sage scrub. – J. Biogeogr. 36: 2176-2188.10.1111/j.1365-2699.2009.02151.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Robertson, M.P., Cumming, G.S. & Erasmus, B.F.N. 2010. Getting the most out of atlas data. –
Divers. Distrib. 16: 363-375.10.1111/j.1472-4642.2010.00639.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Robinson, R.A. & Sutherland, W.J. 2002. Post-war changes in arable farming and biodiversity in
Great Britain. – J. appl. Ecol. 39: 157-176.10.1046/j.1365-2664.2002.00695.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Romell, L.G. 1935. Ecological problems of the humus layer in the forest. – Corn. Univ. agr. Exp.
Stn Mem. 170: 1-28.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Rossi, R.E., Mulla, D.J., Journel, A.G. & Franz, E.H. 1992. Geostatistical tools for modeling and
interpreting ecological spatial dependence. – Ecol. Monogr. 62: 277-314.10.2307/2937096]Search in Google Scholar
[
Rota, C.T., Fletcher, R., Jr., Evans, J.M. & Hutto, R.L. 2011. Does accounting for imperfect detection
improve species distribution models? – Ecography 34: 659-670.10.1111/j.1600-0587.2010.06433.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Rupprecht, F., Oldeland, J. & Finckh, M. 2011. Modelling potential distribution of the threatened
tree species Juniperus oxycedrus: how to evaluate the predictions of different modelling
approaches? – J. Veg. Sci. 22: 647-659.10.1111/j.1654-1103.2011.01269.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Rushton, S.P., Ormerod, S.J. & Kerby, G. 2004. New paradigms for modelling species distributions?
– J. appl. Ecol. 41: 193-200.10.1111/j.0021-8901.2004.00903.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Rydgren, K. 1994. Low-alpine vegetation in Gutulia National Park, Engerdal, Hedmark, Norway,
and its relation to the environment. – Sommerfeltia 21: 1-47.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Rydgren, K. & Økland, R.H. 2002. Life cycle graphs and matrix modelling of bryophyte populations.
– Lindbergia 27: 81-89.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Rydgren, K., Økland, R.H. & Økland, T. 2003. Species response curves along environmental gradients.
A case study from SE Norwegian swamp forests. – J. Veg. Sci. 14: 869-880.10.1111/j.1654-1103.2003.tb02220.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Rydin, H. 1985. Effect of water level on desiccation of Sphagnum in relation to surrounding
Sphagna. – Oikos 45: 376-379.10.2307/3565573]Search in Google Scholar
[
Rydin, H. 2008. Population and community ecology of bryophytes. – In: Goffinet, B. & Shaw, A.J.
(eds), Bryophyte biology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 393-444.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Sagarin, R.D. & Gaines, S.D. 2002. The ‘abundant centre’ distribution: to what extent is it a biogeographic
rule? – Ecol. Letters 5: 137-147.10.1046/j.1461-0248.2002.00297.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Sagarin, R.D., Gaines, S.D. & Gaylord, B. 2006. Moving beyond assumptions to understand abundance
distributions across the ranges of species. – Trends Ecol. Evol. 21: 524-530.10.1016/j.tree.2006.06.00816815588]Search in Google Scholar
[
Salisbury, E.J. 1926. The geographical distribution of plants in relation to climatic factors. –
Geogr. J. 57: 312-335.10.2307/1782828]Search in Google Scholar
[
Santika, T. & Hutchinson, M.F. 2009. The effect of species response form on species distribution
model prediction and inference. – Ecol. Modelling 220: 2365-2379.10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2009.06.004]Search in Google Scholar
[
Schaetzl, R.J., Burns, S.F., Johnson, D.L. & Small, T.W. 1989a. Tree uprooting: review of impacts
on forest ecology. – Vegetatio, 79: 165-176.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Schaetzl, R.J., Johnson, D.L., Burns, S.F. & Small, T.W. 1989b. Tree uprooting: review of terminology,
process and environmental implications. – Can. J. For. Res. 19: 1-11.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Schimper, A.F.W. 1898. Pflanzen-geographie auf physiologischer Grundlage. – Fischer, Jena.
Schmieder, K. & Lehmann, A. 2004. A spatio-temporal framework for efficient inventories of
natural resources: a case study with submersed macrophytes. – J. Veg. Sci. 15: 807-816.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Schweiger, O., Maelfait, J.P., van Wingerden, W., Hendrickx, F., Billeter, R., Speelmans, M., Augenstein,
I., Aukema, B., Aviron, S., Bailey, D., Bukacek, R., Burel, F., Diekötter, T., Dirksen, J.,
Frenzel, M., Herzog, F., Liira, J., Roubalova, M. & Bugter, R. 2005. Quantifying the impact
of environmental factors on arthropod communities in agricultural landscapes across
organizational levels and spatial scales. – J. appl. Ecol. 42: 1129-1139.10.1111/j.1365-2664.2005.01085.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Segurado, P., Araújo, M.B. & Kunin, W.E. 2006. Consequences of spatial autocorrelation for nichebased
models. – J. appl. Ecol. 43: 433-444.10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01162.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Seppä, H., Alenius, T., Bradshaw, R.H.W., Giesecke, T., Heikkilä, M. & Muukkonen, P. 2009. Invasion
of Norway spruce (Picea abies) and the rise of the boreal ecosystem in Fennoscandia. – J.
Ecol. 97: 629-640.10.1111/j.1365-2745.2009.01505.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Shipley, B. 2000. Cause and correlation in biology. – Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Silvertown, J.W. & Charlesworth, D. 2001. Introduction to plant population biology. – Blackwell,
Oxford.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Silvertown, J., Poulton, P., Johnston, E., Edwards, G., Heard, M. & Biss, P.M. 2006. The Park Grass
Experiment 1856–2006: its contribution to ecology. – J. Ecol. 94: 801-814.10.1111/j.1365-2745.2006.01145.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Sjörs, H. 1943. Några myrtyper vid Mjölkvattnet. – Sver. Nat. 34: 81-88.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Sjörs, H. 1948. Myrvegetation i Bergslagen. – Acta phytogeogr. suec. 21: 1-299.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Sjörs, H. 1963. Amphi-atlantic zone: nemoral to arctic. – In: Löve, Á. & Löve, D. (eds), North
atlantic biota and their history, Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp. 109-125.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Skogen, A. 1973. Phytogeographical and ecological studies on Carex paniculata L. in Norway. –
Univ. Bergen Årb. Mat.-naturv. Ser. 1972: 3: 1-12.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Skov, F. & Svenning, J.-C. 2004. Potential impact of climatic change on the distribution of forest
herbs in Europe. – Ecography 27: 366-380.10.1111/j.0906-7590.2004.03823.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Skyllberg, U. 1990. Corrlelation between pH and depth in the mor layer of a Picea abies (L.)
Karst. stand on till soils in northern Sweden. – Scand. J. For. Res. 5: 143-153.10.1080/02827589009382601]Search in Google Scholar
[
Smith, S.E. & Read, D.J. 2008. Mycorrhizal symbiosis, ed. 3. – Academic Press, London.
Soberón, J. 2007. Grinnellian and Eltonian niches and geographic distributions of species. – Ecol.
Letters 10: 1115-1123.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Soberón, J. & Peterson, A.T. 2005. Interpretation of models of fundamental ecological niches
and species’ distributional areas. – Biodiv. Inf. 2: 1-10.10.17161/bi.v2i0.4]Search in Google Scholar
[
Soberón, J.M. 2010. Niche and area of distribution modeling: a population ecology perspective.
– Ecography 33: 159-167.10.1111/j.1600-0587.2009.06074.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Sømme, A. 1954. Jordbrukets geografi i Norge. A. Tekstbind. –Eide, Bergen.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Sokal, R.R. & Rohlf, F.J. 1995. Biometry, ed. 3. – New York, Freeman.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Solli, A. & Nordgulen, Ø. 2007. Berggrunnskart over Norge og kaledonidene i Sverige og Finland
målestokk 1: 2 000 000. – Norges geologiske undersøkelse, Trondheim.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Stankowski, P.A. & Parker, W.H. 2010. Species distribution modelling: Does one size fit all? A
phytogeographic analysis of Salix in Ontario. – Ecol. Modelling, 221: 1655-1664.10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2010.03.016]Search in Google Scholar
[
Stevens, C., Duprè, C., Gaudnik, C., Dorland, E., Dise, N., Gowing, D., Bleeker, A., Alard, D., Bobbink,
R., Fowler, D., Vandvik, V., Corcket, E., Mountford, J.O., Aarrestad, P.A., Muller, S. & Diekmann,
M. 2011. Changes in species composition of European acid grasslands observed along a
gradient of nitrogen deposition. – J. Veg. Sci. 22: 207-215.10.1111/j.1654-1103.2010.01254.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Stockwell, D.R.B. & Peters, D.P. 1999. The GARP modelling system: problems and solutions to
automated spatial prediction. – Int. J. geogr. Inf. Sci 13: 143-158.10.1080/136588199241391]Search in Google Scholar
[
Stokland, J.N., Bakkestuen, V., Bekkby, T., Rinde, E., Skarpaas, O., Sverdrup-Thygeson, A., Yoccos,
N.G. & Halvorsen, R. 2008. Prediksjonsmodellering av arters og naturtypers utbredelse
og forekomst: utfordringer og potensiell bruksverdi i Norge. – NatHist. Mus. (Oslo) Publs
1: 1-72.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Stokland, J.N. & Halvorsen, R. 2011. Romlig prediksjonsmodellering av eik (Quercus spp.) i
Sørøst-Norge. – Univ. Oslo NatHist. Mus. Rapp. 11: 152-175.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Stokland, J.N., Halvorsen, R. & Støa, B. 2011. Species distribution modelling – effect of design and
sample size of pseudo-absence observations. – Ecol. Modelling 222: 1800-1809.10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.02.025]Search in Google Scholar
[
Sulebak, J.R. 2007. Landformer og prosesser. En innføring i naturgeografiske tema. – Fagbokforlaget,
Bergen.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Svenning, J.-C. & Skov, F. 2002. Mesoscale distribution of understorey plants in temperate
forest (Kalø, Denmark): the importance of environment and dispersal. – Pl. Ecol. 160:
169-185.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Svenning, J.-C. & Skov, F. 2005. The relative roles of environment and history as controls of tree
species composition and richness in Europe. – J. Biogeogr. 32: 1019-1034.10.1111/j.1365-2699.2005.01219.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Syphard, A.D. & Franklin, J. 2010. Species traits affect the performance of species distribution
models for plants in southern California. – J. Veg. Sci. 21: 177-189.10.1111/j.1654-1103.2009.01133.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Synes, N.W. & Osborne, P.E. 2011. Choice of predictor variables as a source of uncertainty in
continental-scale species distribution modelling under climate change. – Global Ecol.
Biogeogr. 20: 904-914.10.1111/j.1466-8238.2010.00635.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tansley, A.G. 1935. The use and abuse of vegetational concepts and terms. – Ecology 16: 284-
307.10.2307/1930070]Search in Google Scholar
[
Taylor, D.R., Aarssen, L.W. & Loehle, C. 1990. On the relationship between r/k selection and
environmental carrying capacity: a new habitat templet for plant life history strategies.
– Oikos 58: 239-250.10.2307/3545432]Search in Google Scholar
[
Telenius, A. 2011. Biodiversity information goes public: GBIF at your service. – Nord. J. Bot. 29:
378-381.10.1111/j.1756-1051.2011.01167.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tenow, O. & Bylund, H. 2000. Recovery of a Betula pubescens forest in northern Sweden after
severe defoliation by Epirrita autumnata. – J. Veg. Sci. 11: 855-862.10.2307/3236555]Search in Google Scholar
[
ter Braak, C.J.F. 1987. The analysis of vegetation-environment relationships by canonical correspondence
analysis. – Vegetatio 69: 69-77.10.1007/978-94-009-4061-1_7]Search in Google Scholar
[
ter Braak, C.J.F. & Prentice, I.C. 1988. A theory of gradient analysis. – Adv. ecol. Res. 18: 271-
317.10.1016/S0065-2504(08)60183-X]Search in Google Scholar
[
ter Braak, C.J.F. & Šmilauer, P. 2002. CANOCO reference manual CanoDraw for Windows user’s
guide: software for canonical community ordination (version 4.5). – Microcomputer
Power, Ithaca, N.Y.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Thompson, G.D., Robertson, M.-P., Webber, B.L., Richardson, D.M., Le Roux, J.J. & Wilson, J.R.U.
2011. Predicting the subspecific identity of invasive species using distribution models:
Acacia saligna as an example. – Divers. Distrib. 17: 1001-1014.10.1111/j.1472-4642.2011.00820.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Thorsnes, T., Erikstad, L., Dolan, M.F.J. & Bellec, V.K. 2009. Submarine landscapes along the
Lofoten-Vesterålen-Senja margin, northern Norway. – Norw. J. Geol. 89: 5-16.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Thuiller, W., Albert, C., Araújo, M.B., Berry, P.M., Cabeza, M., Guisan, A., Hickler, T., Midgely, G.F.,
Paterson, J., Schurr, F.M., Sykes, M.T. & Zimmermann, N.E. 2008. Predicting global change
impacts on plant species’ distributions: future challenges. – Persp. Pl. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 9:
137-152.10.1016/j.ppees.2007.09.004]Search in Google Scholar
[
Thuiller, W., Brotons, L., Araújo, M.B. & Lavorel, S. 2004. Effects of restricting environmental range
of data to project current and future species distributions. – Ecography 27: 165-172.10.1111/j.0906-7590.2004.03673.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Thuiller, W., Lafourcade, B., Engler, R. & Araújo, M.B. 2009. BIOMOD - a platform for ensemble
forecasting of species distributions. – Ecography 32: 369-373.10.1111/j.1600-0587.2008.05742.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Thuiller, W., Veyreda, J., Pino, J., Sabate, S., Lavorel, S. & Garcia, C. 2003. Large-scale environmental
correlates of forest tree distributions in Catalonia (NE Spain). – Global Ecol. Biogeogr.
12: 319-325.10.1046/j.1466-822X.2003.00033.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tilman, D. 1982. Resource competition and community structure. – Princeton University Press,
Princeton, New Jersey.10.1515/9780691209654]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tilman, D. 1990. Constraints and trade-offs: toward a predictive theory of competition and
succession. – Oikos 58: 3-15.10.2307/3565355]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tilman, D., May, R.M., Lehman, C.L. & Nowak, M.A. 1994. Habitat destruction and the extinction
debt. – Nature 371: 65-66.10.1038/371065a0]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tingley, R. & Herman, T.B. 2009. Land-cover data improve bioclimatic models for anurans and
turtles at a regional scale. – J. Biogeogr. 36: 1656-1672.10.1111/j.1365-2699.2009.02117.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tollefsrud, M.M., Kissling, R., Gugerli, F., Johnsen, Ø., Skrøppa, T., Cheddadi, R., van der Knaap,
W.O., Latałowa, M., Terhürne-Berson, R., Litt, T., Geburek, T., Brochmann, C. & Sperisen,
C. 2008. Genetic consequences of glacial survival and postglacial colonization in Norway
spruce: combined analysis of mitochondrial DNA and fossil pollen. – Molec. Ecol. 17:
4134-4150.10.1111/j.1365-294X.2008.03893.x19238710]Search in Google Scholar
[
Troedsson, T. & Lyford, W.H. 1973. Biological disturbance and small-scale spatial variations in
a forested soil near Garpenberg, Sweden. – Stud. for. suec. 109: 1-23.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Troedsson, T. & Tamm, C.O. 1969. Small-scale spatial variation in forest soil properties and its
implications for sampling procedures. – Stud. for. suec. 74: 1-30.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tsoar, A., Allouche, O., Steinitz, O., Rotem, D. & Kadmon, R. 2007. A comparative evaluation of
presence-only methods for modelling species distribution. – Divers. Distrib. 13: 397-405.10.1111/j.1472-4642.2007.00346.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tuhkanen, S. 1980. Climatic parameters and indices in plant geography. – Acta phytogeogr.
suec. 67: 1-105.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tuhkanen, S. 1984. A circumboreal system of climatic-phytogeographical regions. – Acta bot.
fenn. 127: 1-50.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tyler, C. 1981. Soil acidity and distribution of species on tussocks and interspaces in Schoenus
vegetation of South and Southeast Sweden. – Vegetatio 44: 25-35.10.1007/BF00119798]Search in Google Scholar
[
Václávík, T. & Meentemeyer, R.K. 2009. Invasive species distribution modeling (iSDM): Are
absence data and dispersal constraints needed to predict actual distributions? – Ecol.
Modelling 220: 3248-3258.10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2009.08.013]Search in Google Scholar
[
van Andel, J. 2005. Species interactions structuring plant communities. – In: van der Maarel, E.
(ed.), Vegetation ecology, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 239-264.]Search in Google Scholar
[
van der Maarel, E. 2005. Vegetation ecology – an overview. – In: van der Maarel, E. (ed.), Vegetation
ecology, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 1-51.]Search in Google Scholar
[
van der Maarel, E., Noest, V. & Palmer, M.W. 1995. Variation in species richness on small grassland
quadrats: niche structure or small-scale plant mobility? – J. Veg. Sci. 6: 741-752.10.2307/3236445]Search in Google Scholar
[
van der Maarel, E. & Sykes, M.T. 1993. Small-scale plant species turnover in a limestone grassland:
the carousel model and some comments on the niche concept. – J. Veg. Sci. 4: 179-188.10.2307/3236103]Search in Google Scholar
[
van der Maarel, E. & Sykes, M.T. 1997. Rates of small-scale species mobility in alvar limestone
grassland. – J. Veg. Sci. 8: 199-208.10.2307/3237348]Search in Google Scholar
[
van Groenendael, J., Ehrlén, J. & Svensson, B.M. 2000. Dispersal and persistence: population
processes and community dynamics. – Folia geobot. 35: 107-114.10.1007/BF02803090]Search in Google Scholar
[
van Herk, C.M., Aptroot, A. & van Dobben, H.F. 2002. Long-term monitoring in the Netherlands
suggests that lichens respond to global warming. – Lichenologist 34: 141-154.10.1006/lich.2002.0378]Search in Google Scholar
[
van Niel, K.P. & Austin, M.P. 2007. Predictive vegetation modeling for conservation: impact of
error propagation from digital elevation data. – Ecol. Appl. 17: 266-280.10.1890/1051-0761(2007)017[0266:PVMFCI]2.0.CO;2]Search in Google Scholar
[
van Niel, K.P., Laffan, S.W. & Lees, B.G. 2004. Effect of error in the DEM on environmental variables
for predictive vegetation modelling. – J. Veg. Sci. 15: 747-756.10.1111/j.1654-1103.2004.tb02317.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Vandermeer, J.H. 1972. Niche theory. – A. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 3: 107-132.10.1146/annurev.es.03.110172.000543]Search in Google Scholar
[
VanDerWal, J., Shoo, L.P., Graham, C.H. & Williams, S.E. 2009. Selecting pseudo-absence data for
presence-only distribution modeling: how far should you stay from what you know? –
Ecol. Modelling 220: 589-594.10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2008.11.010]Search in Google Scholar
[
Vandvik, V. & Birks, H.J.B. 2002. Pattern and process in Norwegian upland grasslands: a functional
analysis. – J. Veg. Sci. 13: 123-134.10.1111/j.1654-1103.2002.tb02029.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Vaughan, I.P. & Ormerod, S.J. 2005. The continuing challenges of testing species distribution
models. – J. appl. Ecol. 42: 720-730.10.1111/j.1365-2664.2005.01052.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Vellend, M. 2001. Do commonly used indices of β-diversity measure species turnover? – J. Veg.
Sci. 12: 545-552.10.2307/3237006]Search in Google Scholar
[
Vellend, M., Verheyen, K., Jacquemyn, H., Kolb, A., van Calster, H., Peterken, G. & Hermy, M. 2006.
Extinction debt of forest plants persists for more than a century following habitat fragmentation.
– Ecology 87: 542-548.10.1890/05-118216602283]Search in Google Scholar
[
Veloz, S.D. 2009. Spatially autocorrelated sampling falsely inflates measures of accuracy for
presence-only niche models. – J. Biogeogr. 36: 2290-2299.10.1111/j.1365-2699.2009.02174.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Venables, W.N. & Ripley, B.D. 2002. Modern applied statistics with S. – Springer, New York.10.1007/978-0-387-21706-2]Search in Google Scholar
[
Vestergren, T. 1902. Om den olikformiga snöbetäckningens inflytande på vegetationen i Sarekfjällen.
– Bot. Not. 55: 241-268.]Search in Google Scholar
[
von Wehrden, H., Hanspach, J., Bruelheide, H. & Wesche, K. 2009. Pluralism and diversity: trends
in the use and application of ordination methods 1990-2007. – J. Veg. Sci. 20: 695-705.10.1111/j.1654-1103.2009.01063.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wagner, H.H. 2004. Direct multi-scale ordination with canonical correspondence analysis. –Ecology 85: 342-351.10.1890/02-0738]Search in Google Scholar
[
Walker, D.A., Bockheim, J.G., Chapin, F.S.I., Eugster, W., Nelson, F.E. & Ping, C.L. 2001. Calcium-rich
tundra, wildlife, and the ‘‘Mammoth Steppe’’. – Quat. Sci. Rev. 20: 149-163.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Walter, H. & Walter, E. 1953. Das Gesetz der relativen Standortskonstanz: Das Wesen der Pflanzengesellschaften.
– Ber. dt. bot. Ges. 66: 228-236.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ward, G., Hastie, T., Barry, S., Elith, J. & Leathwick, J.R. 2009. Presence-only data and the EM
algorithm. – Biometrics 65: 554-563.10.1111/j.1541-0420.2008.01116.x482188618759851]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wardle, D.A., Nilsson, M.C., Gallet, C. & Zackrisson, O. 1998. An ecosystem level perspective of
allelopathy. – Biol. Rev. Camb. phil. Soc. 73: 305-319.10.1017/S0006323198005192]Search in Google Scholar
[
Warren, D.L., Glor, R.E. & Turelli, M. 2008. Environmental niche equivalency versus conservatism:
quantitative approaches to niche evolution. – Evolution 62: 2868-2883.10.1111/j.1558-5646.2008.00482.x18752605]Search in Google Scholar
[
Warren, D.L. & Seifert, S.N. 2011. Ecological niche modeling in Maxent: the importance of model
complexity and the performance of model selection criteria. – Ecol. Appl. 21: 335-342.10.1890/10-1171.121563566]Search in Google Scholar
[
Webber, B.L., Yates, C.J., La Maitre, D.C., Scott, J.K., Kriticos, D.J., Ota, N., McNeill, A., Le Roux, J.J.
& Midgley, G.F. 2011. Modelling horses for novel climate courses: insights from projecting
potential distributions of native and alien Australian acacias with correlative and
mechanistic models. – Divers. Distrib. 17: 978-1000.10.1111/j.1472-4642.2011.00811.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Weber, T.C. 2011. Maximum entropy modeling of mature hardwood forest distribution in four
U.S. states. – For. Ecol. Mgmt 261: 779-788.10.1016/j.foreco.2010.12.009]Search in Google Scholar
[
Weber, T.P. 1999. A plea for a diversity of scientific styles in ecology. – Oikos 84: 526-529.
Weibull, H. 2001. Influence of tree species on the epilithic bryophyte flora in deciduous forests
of Sweden. – J. Bryol. 23: 55-66.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Westhoff, V. & van der Maarel, E. 1978. The Braun-Blanquet approach. – In: Whittaker, R.H. (ed.),
Classification of vegetation, Junk, The Hague, pp. 287-399.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Westman, W.E. 1980. Gaussian analysis, identifying environmental factors influencing bellshaped
species distributions. – Ecology 61: 733-739.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wheeler, B.D. & Proctor, M.C.F. 2000. Ecological gradients, subdivisions and terminology of
north-west European mires. – J. Ecol. 88: 187-203.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Whittaker, R.H. 1951. A criticism of the plant association and climatic climax concepts. – NW.
Sci. 25: 17-31.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Whittaker, R.H. 1952. A study of summer foliage insect communities in the Great Smoky Mountains.
– Ecol. Monogr. 22: 1-44.10.2307/1948527]Search in Google Scholar
[
Whittaker, R.H. 1956. Vegetation of the Great Smoky Mountains. – Ecol. Monogr. 26: 1-80.10.2307/1943577]Search in Google Scholar
[
Whittaker, R.H. 1962. Classification of natural communities. – Bot. Rev. 28: 1-239.10.1007/BF02860872]Search in Google Scholar
[
Whittaker, R.H. 1967. Gradient analysis of vegetation. – Biol. Rev. Camb. phil. Soc. 42: 207-
264.10.1111/j.1469-185X.1967.tb01419.x4859903]Search in Google Scholar
[
Whittaker, R.H. 1978. Dominance-types. – In: Whittaker, R.H. (ed.), Classification of vegetation,
Junk, The Hague, pp. 65-79.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Whittaker, R.H., Levin, S.A. & Root, R.B. 1973. Niche, habitat and ecotope. – Am. Nat. 107: 321-
338.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Whittaker, R.J., Araújo, M.B., Jepson, P., Ladle, R.J., J.E.M., W. & Willis, K.J. 2005. Conservation
biogeography: assessment and prospect. – Divers. Distrib. 11: 3-23.10.1111/j.1366-9516.2005.00143.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Whittaker, R.J. & Kerr, J.T. 2011. In search of general models in evolutionary time and space. – J.
Biogeogr. 38: 11: 2041-2042.10.1111/j.1365-2699.2011.02608.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Whittaker, R.J., Willis, K.J. & Field, R. 2001. Scale and species richness: towards a general, hierarchical
theory of species diversity. – J. Biogeogr. 28: 453-470.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wiens, J.A. 1989. Spatial scaling in ecology. Funct. Ecol. 3: 385-397.10.2307/2389612]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wiens, J.A. 2002. Central concepts and issues of landscape ecology. – In: Gutzwiller, K.J. (ed.),
Applying landscape ecology in biological conservation. Springer, New York, pp. 3-21.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wiens, J.A. 2009. Landscape ecology as a foundation for sustainable conservation. – Landsc.
Ecol. 24: 1053-1065.10.1007/s10980-008-9284-x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wijk, S. 1986. Performance of Salix herbacea in an alpine snow-bed gradient. – J. Ecol. 74: 675-
684.10.2307/2260390]Search in Google Scholar
[
Willard, B.E., Cooper, D.J. & Forbes, B.C. 2007. Natural regeneration of alpine tundra vegetation
after human trampling: a 42-year data set from Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado,
USA. – Arct. antarct. alp. Res. 39: 177-183.10.1657/1523-0430(2007)39[177:NROATV]2.0.CO;2]Search in Google Scholar
[
Williams, M.R., Lamont, B.B. & Henstridge, J.D. 2009. Species–area functions revisited. – J. Biogeogr.
36: 1994-2004.10.1111/j.1365-2699.2009.02110.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Williams, J.N., Seo, C.W., Thorne, J., Nelson, J.K., Erwin, S., O’Brien, J.M. & Schwartz, M.W. 2009.
Using species distribution models to predict new occurrences for rare plants. – Divers.
Distrib. 15: 565-576.10.1111/j.1472-4642.2009.00567.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Willis, K.J. & Whittaker, R.J. 2002. Species diversity - scale matters. – Science 295: 1245-1248.
Wilson, J.B. 2003. The deductive method in community ecology. – Oikos 101: 216-218.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wilson, J.B. 2011. Cover plus: ways of measuring plant canopies and the terms used for them.
– J. Veg. Sci. 22: 197-206.10.1111/j.1654-1103.2010.01238.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wisz, M.S., Hijmans, R.J., Li, J., Peterson, A.T., Graham, C.H., Guisan, A. & The NCEAS Predicting
Species Distributions Working Group, 2008. Effects of sample size on the performance
of species distribution models. – Divers. Distrib. 14: 763-773.10.1111/j.1472-4642.2008.00482.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wollan, A.K., Bakkestuen, V. & Halvorsen, R. 2011. Romlig prediksjonsmodellering av åpen grunnlendt
kalkmark i Oslofjord-området. – Univ. Oslo NatHist. Mus. Rapp. 11: 176-196.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wollan, A.K., Bakkestuen, V., Kauserud, H., Gulden, G. & Halvorsen, R. 2008. Modelling and predicting
fungal distribution patterns using herbarium data. – J. Biogeogr. 35: 2298-2310.10.1111/j.1365-2699.2008.01965.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wolmarans, R., Robertson, M.P. & van Rensburg, B.J. 2010. Predicting invasive alien plant distributions:
how geographical bias in occurrence records influences model performance. – J.
Biogeogr. 37: 1797-1810.10.1111/j.1365-2699.2010.02325.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wood, S.N. 2006. Generalized additive models. – Chapman & Hall, London.10.1201/9781420010404]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wu, J.G. 2004. Effects of changing scale on landscape pattern analysis: scaling relations. – Landsc.
Ecol. 19: 125-138.10.1023/B:LAND.0000021711.40074.ae]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wu, J.G. & Loucks, O.L. 1995. From balance of nature to hierarchical patch dynamics: a paradigm
shift in ecology. – Q. Rev. Biol. 70: 439-466.10.1086/419172]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wulf, M. & Naaf, T. 2009. Herb layer response to broadleaf tree species with different leaf litter
quality and canopy structure in temperate forests. – J. Veg. Sci. 20: 517-526.10.1111/j.1654-1103.2009.05713.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Zackrisson, O. & Nilsson, M.-C. 1992. Allelopathic effects by Empetrum hermaphroditum on seed
germination of two boreal tree species. – Can. J. For. Res. 22: 1310-1319.10.1139/x92-174]Search in Google Scholar
[
Zafra-Calvo, N., Rodríguez, M.A. & Lobo, J.M. 2010. Discerning the impact of human-mediated
factors on biodiversity using bioclimatic envelope models and partial regression techniques.
– Divers. Distrib. 16: 300-309.10.1111/j.1472-4642.2010.00643.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Zobel, M. 1992. Plant species coexistence: the role of historical, evolutionary and ecological
factors. – Oikos 65: 314-320.]Search in Google Scholar
[
Zurell, D., Jeltsch, F., Dormann, C.F. & Schröder, B. 2009. Static species distribution models in
dynamically changing systems: how good can predictions really be? – Ecography 32:
733-744.10.1111/j.1600-0587.2009.05810.x]Search in Google Scholar
[
Zuur, A.F., Ieno, E.N. & Smith, G.M. 2007. Analysing ecological data. – Springer, New York.10.1007/978-0-387-45972-1]Search in Google Scholar
[
Zuur, A.F., Ieno, E.N., Walker, N.J., Saveliev, A.A. & Smith, G.M. 2009. Mixed effects models and
extension in ecology with R. – Springer, New York, US.
10.1007/978-0-387-87458-6]Search in Google Scholar
