Journal article
Authors list: de Bruyn, M; Stelbrink, B; Page, TJ; Phillips, MJ; Lohman, DJ; Albrecht, C; Hall, R; von Rintelen, K; Ng, PKL; Shih, HT; Carvalho, GR; von Rintelen, T
Publication year: 2013
Pages: 2204-2206
Journal: Journal of Biogeography
Volume number: 40
Issue number: 11
Open access status: Bronze
DOI Link: https://doi.org/10.1111/jbi.12166
Publisher: Wiley
Abstract:
A recent Guest Editorial by Parenti & Ebach (2013, Journal of Biogeography, 40, 813-820) disagrees with the methods or interpretations in two of our recent papers. In addition, the authors open a debate on biogeographical concepts, and present an alternative philosophy for biogeographical research in the context of their recently described biogeographical subregion called Pandora'. We disagree with their approach and conclusions, and comment on several issues related to our differing conceptual approaches for biogeographical research; namely, our use of molecular phylogenetic analyses, including time estimates; and Parenti & Ebach's reliance on taxon/general area cladograms. Finally, we re-examine their tests' supporting the existence of Pandora'.
Citation Styles
Harvard Citation style: de Bruyn, M., Stelbrink, B., Page, T., Phillips, M., Lohman, D., Albrecht, C., et al. (2013) Time and space in biogeography: response to Parenti & Ebach (2013), Journal of Biogeography, 40(11), pp. 2204-2206. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbi.12166
APA Citation style: de Bruyn, M., Stelbrink, B., Page, T., Phillips, M., Lohman, D., Albrecht, C., Hall, R., von Rintelen, K., Ng, P., Shih, H., Carvalho, G., & von Rintelen, T. (2013). Time and space in biogeography: response to Parenti & Ebach (2013). Journal of Biogeography. 40(11), 2204-2206. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbi.12166