Neutral models for the analysis of broad-scale landscape pattern
- Nature and Landscape Conservation
- Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
- Global and Planetary Change
- Journal
- Landscape Ecology
In The Last Decade
doi.org/10.1007/bf02275262 →Countries where authors are citing Neutral models for the analysis of broad-scale landscape pattern
This map shows the geographic impact of Neutral models for the analysis of broad-scale landscape pattern. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Neutral models for the analysis of broad-scale landscape pattern with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Neutral models for the analysis of broad-scale landscape pattern more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Neutral models for the analysis of broad-scale landscape pattern
This network shows the impact of Neutral models for the analysis of broad-scale landscape pattern. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Neutral models for the analysis of broad-scale landscape pattern.
About Neutral models for the analysis of broad-scale landscape pattern
This paper, published in 1987, received 561 indexed citations . Written by Robert H. Gardner, Bruce T. Milne and Robert V. O’Neill covering the research area of Nature and Landscape Conservation, Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics and Global and Planetary Change. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Global and Planetary Change (342 citations), Nature and Landscape Conservation (298 citations) and Ecology (272 citations). Published in Landscape Ecology.
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.
This paper is also available at doi.org/10.1007/bf02275262.