Blackburn, T. M., P. Cassey & K. J. Gaston, 2006. Variations on a theme: sources of heterogeneity in the form of the interspecific relationship between abundance and distribution. Journal of Animal Ecology 75: 1426–1439.CrossRefPubMed
Broennimann, O., W. Thuiller, G. Hughes, G. F. Midgley, J. M. R. Alkemade & A. Guisan, 2006. Do geographic distribution, niche property and life form explain plants’ vulnerability to global change? Global Change Biology 12: 1079–1093.CrossRef
Brown, J. H., 1984. On the relationship between abundance and distribution of species. American Naturalist 124: 255–279.CrossRef
Chase, J. M. & M. A. Leibold, 2003. Ecological Niches – Linking Classical and Contemporary Approaches. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
Chave, J., H. C. Muller-Landau & S. A. Levin, 2002. Comparing classical community models: theoretical consequences for patterns of diversity. The American Naturalist 159: 1–23.CrossRefPubMed
Corkum, L. D., 1992. Spatial distribution patterns of macroinvertebrates along rivers within and among biomes. Hydrobiologia 239: 101–114.CrossRef
Cottenie, K., 2005. Integrating environmental and spatial processes in ecological community dynamics. Ecology Letters 8: 1175–1182.CrossRef
Death, R. G. & M. K. Joy, 2004. Invertebrate community structure in streams of the Manawatu-Wanganui region, New Zealand: the roles of catchment versus reach scale influences. Freshwater Biology 49: 982–997.CrossRef
Dolédec, S., D. Chessel & C. Gimaret-Carpentier, 2000. Niche separation in community analysis: a new method. Ecology 81: 2914–2927.
Dray, S. & A. B. Dufour, 2007. The ade4 package: implementing the duality diagram for ecologists. Journal of Statistical Software 22: 1–20.
Ferrington Jr., L. C., 2008. Global diversity of non-biting chironomids (Chironomidae; Insecta-Diptera) in freshwater. Hydrobiologia 595: 447–455.CrossRef
Frissell, C. A., W. J. Wiss, C. E. Warren & M. D. Huxley, 1986. A hierarchical framework for stream classification: viewing streams in watershed context. Environmental Management 10: 199–214.CrossRef
Gaston, K. J., 1994. Rarity. Chapman & Hall, London.
Gaston, K. J. & T. M. Blackburn, 2000. Pattern and Process in Macroecology. Blackwell, London.CrossRef
Gaston, K. J., T. M. Blackburn & J. H. Lawton, 1997. Interspecific abundance-range size relationships: an appraisal of mechanisms. Journal of Animal Ecology 66: 579–601.CrossRef
Gaston, K. J., T. M. Blackburn, R. D. Gregory & J. J. D. Greenwood, 1998. The anatomy of the interspecific abundance-range size relationship for the British avifauna: I. Spatial patterns. Ecology Letters 1: 38–46.CrossRef
Gaston, K. J., T. M. Blackburn, J. J. D. Greenwood, R. D. Gregory, R. M. Quinn & J. H. Lawton, 2000. Abundance–occupancy relationships. Journal of Applied Ecology 37: 39–59.CrossRef
Gonzalez, A., J. H. Lawton, F. S. Gilbert, T. M. Blackburn & I. Evans-Freke, 1998. Metapopulation dynamics maintain the positive species abundance–distribution relationship. Science 281: 2045–2047.CrossRefPubMed
Hanski, I., 1991. Single-species metapopulation dynamics: concepts, models and observations. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 42: 17–38.CrossRef
Hanski, I., J. Kouki & A. Halkka, 1993. Three explanations of the positive relationship between distribution and abundance of species. In Ricklefs, R. E. & D. Schluter (eds), Species Diversity in Ecological Communities: Historical and Geographical Perspectives. University of Chicago Press, Chicago: 108–116.
Harcourt, A. H., S. A. Coppeto & S. A. Park, 2005. The distribution–abundance (density) relationship: its form and causes in a tropical mammal order, primates. Journal of Biogeography 32: 565–579.CrossRef
Heino, J., 2005. Positive relationship between regional distribution and local abundance in stream insects: a consequence of niche breadth or niche position? Ecography 28: 345–354.CrossRef
Heino, J. & R. Virtanen, 2006. Relationships between distribution and abundance vary with spatial scale and ecological group in stream bryophytes. Freshwater Biology 51: 1879–1889.CrossRef
Holt, R. D., 1993. Ecology at the mesoscale: the influence of regional processes on local communities. In Ricklefs, R. E. & D. Schluter (eds), Species Diversity in Ecological Communities: Historical and Geographical Perspectives. University of Chicago Press, Chicago: 77–88.
Hutchinson, G. E., 1957. Concluding remarks. Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology 22: 145–159.
Hynes, H. B. N., 1970. The Ecology of Running Waters. University of Toronto Press, Toronto.
Leibold, M. A., M. Holyoak, N. Mouquet, P. Amarasekare, J. M. Chase, M. F. Hoopes, R. D. Holt, J. B. Shurin, R. Law & D. Tilman, 2004. The metacommunity concept: a framework for multi-scale community ecology. Ecology Letters 7: 601–613.CrossRef
Lenat, D. R. & V. H. Resh, 2001. Taxonomy and stream ecology: the benefits of genus and species identifications. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 20: 287–298.CrossRef
Marchant, R., L. A. Barmuta & B. C. Chessman, 1995. Influence of sample quantification and taxonomic resolution on the ordination of macroinvertebrate communities from running waters in Victoria, Australia. Marine and Freshwater Research 46: 501–506.CrossRef
McGarigal, K., S. A. Cushman, M. C. Neel & E. Ene, 2002. Fragstats: Spatial Pattern Analysis Program for Categorical Maps. Computer Software Program produced by the authors at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst [available at the following web site: www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/fragstats.html
Melo, A., 2005. Effects of taxonomic and numeric resolution on the ability to detect ecological patterns at a local scale using stream macroinvertebrates. Archiv fur Hydrobiologie 164: 309–323.CrossRef
Metzger, J. P., M. C. Ribeiro, G. Ciocheti & L. R. Tambosi, 2008. Uso de índices de paisagem para a definição de ações de conservação e restauração da biodiversidade do Estado de São Paulo. In Rodrigues, R. R., C. A. Joly, M. C. W. Brito, A. Paese, J. P. Metzger, L. Casatti, M. A. Nalon, N. Menezes, N. M. Ivanauskas, V. Bolzani & V. L. R. Bononi (eds), Diretrizes para Conservação e Restauração da Biodiversidade no Estado de São Paulo. Secretaria do Meio Ambiente & FAPESP, São Paulo: 120–127.
Mouquet, N. & M. Loreau, 2002. Coexistence in metacommunities: the regional similarity hypothesis. The American Naturalist 159: 420–426.CrossRefPubMed
Murphy, J. F. & J. Davy-Bowker, 2005. Spatial structure in lotic macroinvertebrate communities in England and Wales: relationships with physicochemical and anthropogenic stress variables. Hydrobiologia 534: 151–164.CrossRef
Murray, B. R., C. R. Fonseca & M. Westoby, 1998. The macroecology of Australian frogs. Journal of Animal Ecology 67: 567–579.CrossRef
Oliveira-Filho, A. T. & M. A. L. Fontes, 2000. Patterns of floristic differentiation among Atlantic forests in south-eastern Brazil, and the influence of climate. Biotropica 32: 793–810.
Pinder, L. C. V., 1986. Biology of freshwater chironomidae. Annual Review of Entomology 31: 1–23.
Poff, N. L., 1997. Landscape filters and species traits: towards mechanistic understanding and prediction in stream ecology. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 16: 391–409.CrossRef
R Development Core Team, 2006. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. http://www.R-roject.org
Richards, C., R. J. Haro, L. B. Johnson & G. E. Host, 1997. Catchment and reach-scale properties as indicators of macroinvertebrate species traits. Freshwater Biology 37: 219–230.CrossRef
Schoener, T. W., 1989. The ecological niche. In Cherret, J. (ed.), Ecological Concepts: The Contribution of Ecology to an Understanding of the Natural World. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford: 790–813.
Soininen, J. & J. Heino, 2005. Relationships between local population persistence, local abundance and regional occupancy of species: patterns in diatoms of boreal streams. Journal of Biogeography 32: 1971–1978.CrossRef
Spies, M. & O. A. Sæther, 2004. Notes and recommendations on taxonomy and nomenclature of Chironomidae (Diptera). Zootaxa 752: 1–90.
Tales, E., P. Keith & T. Oberdorff, 2004. Density-range size relationship in French riverine fishes. Oecologia 138: 360–370.CrossRefPubMed
Thuiller, W., S. Lavorel & M. B. Araujo, 2005. Niche properties and geographical extent as predictors of species sensitivity to climate change. Global Ecology and Biogeography 14: 347–357.CrossRef
Umetsu, F., J. P. Metzger & R. Pardini, 2008. Importance of estimating matrix quality for modeling species distribution in complex tropical landscapes: a test with Atlantic forest small mammals. Ecography 31: 359–370.CrossRef
Venier, L. A. & L. Fahrig, 1996. Habitat availability causes the species abundance–distribution relationship. Oikos 76: 564–570.CrossRef
Vinson, M. R. & C. P. Hawkins, 1998. Biodiversity of stream insects: variation at local, basin, and regional spatial scales. Annual Review of Entomology 43: 271–293.CrossRefPubMed
Warren, P. H. & K. J. Gaston, 1997. Interspecific abundance–occupancy relationships: a test of mechanisms using microcosms. Journal of Animal Ecology 66: 730–742.CrossRef
Wiens, J. A., 2002. Riverine landscapes: taking landscape ecology into the water. Freshwater Biology 47: 501–515.CrossRef
Williams, C. B., 1960. The range and pattern of insect abundance. American Naturalist 94: 137–151.CrossRef