|
Week
|
Readings
|
|
August 30
|
-
- Paper #2: Diversity and invasibility: [PDF]
- Paper #3: Response to paper 2 [PDF]
|
September 6 |
- Paper #1: Gardner, R. H., B. Milne, M. Turner, and R. O'Neill. 1987. Neutral models for the analysis of broadscale landscape pattern. Landscape ecology 1:19-28. [PDF]
- Paper #2: With, K. A., and A. W. King. 1997. The use and misuse of neutral landscape models in ecology. Oikos 79:219-229. [PDF]
- Paper #3: Fortin, M.-J., B. Boots, F. Csillag, and T. K. Remmel. 2003. On the role of spatial stochastic models in understanding landscape indices in ecology. Oikos 102:203-212. [PDF]
|
September 13 |
- Paper #1: Peterson, C. J., and E. R. Squiers. 1995. An unexpected change in spatial pattern across 10 years in an aspen—white-pine forest. Journal of Ecology 83:847-855. [PDF]
- Paper #2: Klaas, B. A., K. A. Moloney, and B. J. Danielson. 2000. The tempo and mode of gopher mound production in a tallgrass prairie remnant. Ecography 23:246-256.. [PDF]
- Paper #3: Rogers, W. E., and D. C. Hartnett. 2001. Vegetation responses to different spatial patterns of soil disturbance in burned and unburned tallgrass prairie. Plant Ecology 155:99-109. [PDF]
|
September 20 |
- Paper #1:Rossi, R., D. J. Mulla, A. G. Journel, and E. H. Franz. 1992. Geostatistical tools for modeling and interpreting ecological spatial dependence. Ecological Monographs 62:277-314. [PDF]
- Paper #2: Schlesinger, W. H., J. A. Raikes, A. E. Hartley, and A. F. Cross. 1996. On the spatial pattern of soil nutrients in desert ecosystems. Ecology 77:364-374.. [PDF]
|
September 27 |
- Background reading: Excerpt on autocorrelation analysis (from Chatfield. 1984. The Analysis of Time Series: an introduction. Chapman and Hall. New York) [PDF]
|
October 4 |
- Paper #1: McIntyre, N.E., and Wiens, J.A. 1999. How does habitat patch size affect animal movement? An experiment with darkling beetles. Ecology 80: 2261-2270 [PDF]
- Paper #2: Haddad, N.M. 1999 Corridor use predicted from behaviors at habitat boundaries. American Naturalist 153: 215-227 [ PDF]
|
October 4 |
- Background reading: Lobo, A., K. A. Moloney, O. Chic, and N. Chiariello. 1998. Analysis of fine-scale spatial pattern of a grassland from remotely-sensed imagery and field collected data. Landscape Ecology 13 :111-131. [PDF]
|
October 18 |
- Paper #1: Steven L. Peck. 2004. Simulation as experiment: a philosophical reassessment for biological modeling, Trends in Ecology & Evolution 19(10):530-534. [PDF]
- Paper #2: Colasanti, R., and J. P. Grime. 1993. Resource dynamics and vegetation processes: a deterministic model using two-dimensional cellular automata. Functional Ecology 7:169-176. [PDF]
- Paper #3: Eloy Revilla, Thorsten Wiegand, Francisco Palomares, Pablo Ferreras, and Miguel Delibes. 2004. Effects of Matrix Heterogeneity on Animal Dispersal: From Individual Behavior to
Metapopulation-Level Parameters. American Naturalist 164 (5):E130-153. [PDF]
- Background reading: Robertson, G. P., M. A. Huston, F. C. Evans, and J. M. Tiedje. 1988. Spatial variability in a successional plant community: patterns of nitrogen availability. Ecology 69:1517-1524. [PDF]
|
October 25 |
- Paper #1: Kaitala and Ranta. 1998. Traveling wave dynamics and self-organization ina a spatio-temporally structured population. Ecology Letters 1:186-192. . [PDF]
- Paper #2: Bolliger, Sprott and Mladenoff. 2003. Self-organization and complexity in historical landscape pattersn. Oikos 100: 541-553. [PDF]
|
November 1 |
- Paper #1: Johnson, D.M., Bjornstad, O.N., and Liebhold, A.M. 2004. Landscape geometry and travelling waves in the larch budmoth. Ecology Letters 7 : 967–974 [PDF]
- Paper #2: Veech, J. A. 2000. A null model for detecting nonrandom patterns of species richness along spatial gradients. Ecology 81:1143.
[PDF]
- Background reading: Palmer, M. 1992. The coexistence of species in fractal landscapes. American Naturalist 139:375-397. [PDF]
|
November 8 |
- Paper #1: Harrison, S., D. D. Murphy, and P. R. Ehrlich. 1988. Distribution of the Bay Checkerspot Butterfly, Euphydryas editha bayensis: Evidence for a Metapopulation Model. American Naturalist 132:360-382. [PDF]
- Paper #2: Burkey, T. V. 1997. Metapopulation Extinction in Fragmented Landscapes: Using Bacteria and Protozoa Communities as Model Ecosystems. American Naturalist 150:568-591. [PDF]
|
November 15 |
- Paper #1: Ovaskainen, O. and I. Hanski. 2004. From Individual Behavior to Metapopulation Dynamics: Unifying the Patchy Population and Classic Metapopulation Models. American Naturalist 164(3): 364-377. [PDF]
- Paper #2:Appendix to paper #1. [PDF]
- Background reading: Hanski,
Ilkka, Atte Moilanen, and Mats Gyllenberg
1996. Minimum viable metapopulation size. American Naturalist 147(4):
527-541. [PDF]
|
December 1 |
- Paper #1: Ruggiero, A., and T. Kitzberger. 2004. Environmental correlates of mammal species richness in South America: effects of spatial structure, taxonomy and geographic range. Ecography 27:401-417. [PDF]
- Paper #2:Tognelli, M. F., and D. A. Kelt. 2004. Analysis of determinants of mammalian species richness in South America using spatial autoregressive models. Ecography 27:427-436. [PDF]
|
