How should a dendrogram-based measure of functional diversity function? A rejoinder to Petchey and Gaston

32Citations
Citations of this article
139Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

This paper is a response to Petchey and Gaston's criticism of our previous paper on the measurement of dendrogram-based functional diversity. In contrast to their suggestions, we insist that Euclidean distance is unsuitable to the analysis of variables with mixed scale types and maintain our earlier view that both the distance function and the clustering method can influence the dendrogram-based measure of functional diversity. We propose an extension of Gower's formula to accommodate nominal traits with non-exclusive categories and emphasize the necessity of the methodological standardization of functional diversity measures. © Oikos.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Podani, J., & Schmera, D. (2007). How should a dendrogram-based measure of functional diversity function? A rejoinder to Petchey and Gaston. Oikos. Blackwell Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0030-1299.2007.16160.x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free