Niche breadth predicts geographical range size: a general ecological pattern
- Journal
- Ecology Letters
In The Last Decade
doi.org/10.1111/ele.12140 →Countries where authors are citing Niche breadth predicts geographical range size: a general ecological pattern
This map shows the geographic impact of Niche breadth predicts geographical range size: a general ecological 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 Niche breadth predicts geographical range size: a general ecological pattern with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Niche breadth predicts geographical range size: a general ecological pattern more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Niche breadth predicts geographical range size: a general ecological pattern
This network shows the impact of Niche breadth predicts geographical range size: a general ecological pattern. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Niche breadth predicts geographical range size: a general ecological pattern.
About Niche breadth predicts geographical range size: a general ecological pattern
This paper, published in 2013, received 643 indexed citations . Written by Rachel Slatyer, Megan J. Hirst and Jason P. Sexton covering the research area of Ecological Modeling, Nature and Landscape Conservation and Ecology. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Ecological Modeling (335 citations), Ecology (314 citations) and Nature and Landscape Conservation (292 citations). Published in Ecology Letters.
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/10.1111/ele.12140.