Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 5 - Functional and Phylogenetic Diversity–Area Relationships

  • from Part II - Diversity–Area Relationships: The Different Types and Underlying Factors
  • Edited by Thomas J. Matthews, University of Birmingham, Kostas A. Triantis, Robert J. Whittaker, University of Oxford
  • Book:
    The Species–Area Relationship
    Published online:
    11 March 2021
    Print publication:
    18 March 2021, pp 107-132

  • Summary

    The species–area relationship (SAR) has been documented for a wide range of organisms, ecosystems and spatial scales. In contrast, little is known about the spatial scaling of functional and phylogenetic diversity, two other important facets of biodiversity. Describing and understanding how functional and phylogenetic diversity scale with area represents a promising research programme to unravel community assembly mechanisms across spatial scales, and to predict the loss of functional and phylogenetic diversity from habitat loss. In this review, our aim is to provide (1) practical recommendations to measure functional and phylogenetic diversity and to construct functional and phylogenetic diversity–area relationships, (2) a theoretical background on how to interpret the shape of phylogenetic diversity–area relationships and (3) an overview of the empirical phylogenetic diversity–area relationships published to date. We conclude by proposing a series of recommendations for future work.