Biodiversity modeling is about multiple species and their relationships, in contrast to individual species and their environment. This leads to slightly different approaches and problems. My selection of the documents of historic influence, the programs in the field, and some of the more important recent papers follow.

Reports

• An Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia: A Framework for Setting Priorities in the National Reserves System Cooperative Program. – R Thackway and I D Cresswell (Editors)
  Australian Nature Conservation Agency, 1995.
  This and the following reports have been influential in the development of comprehensive approaches using biodiveristy modeling for conservation planning.

• Revision of the Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia (IBRA) and Development of Version 5.1 – Summary Report, Environment Australia, November 2000
• The GAP analysis program.
  The goal of the GAP Analysis Program is to keep common species common by identifying those species and plant communities that are not adequately represented in existing conservation lands.
• NBII Biodiversity Modeling Workshop
  
  This publication offers the proceedings of a workshop held July 27-31, 2003, in Kihei, Maui, Hawaii. Aims to provide access to key data sets for applications and to enable development and distribution of models and tools to apply those data to address needs of biodiversity enterprises.

• 
  An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Environmental Surrogates and Modelling Techniques in Predicting the Distribution of Biological Diversity -
  Simon Ferrier and Graham Watson – NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service
  Department of Environment, Sport and Territories, 1997.

  Articles

• Spatial modelling of biodiversity at the community level – SIMON FERRIER and ANTOINE GUISAN (2006).
  
  The potential benefits of modelling large multispecies
  data sets using community-level, as opposed to species-level, approaches include faster
  processing, increased power to detect shared patterns of environmental response across
  rarely recorded species, and enhanced capacity to synthesize complex data into a form more
  readily interpretable by scientists and decision-makers. Community-level modelling
  therefore deserves to be considered more often, and more widely, as a potential alternative
  or supplement to modelling individual species.

• PLACE PRIORITIZATION FOR BIODIVERSITY REPRESENTATION USING
  SPECIES’ ECOLOGICAL NICHE MODELING – Víctor Sánchez-Cordero, Verónica Cirelli, Mariana Munguía, and Sahotra Sarka (2006).
  
  Distributional predictions provide a framework for use of species as biodiversity surrogates in place prioritization procedures such as those based on rarity and complementarity.

• 
  Modelling spatial patterns of biodiversity for conservation prioritization in North-eastern Mexico
  – Miguel A. Ortega-Huerta and A. T. Peterson (2004).
  
  Individual niche models were combined with heuristic, complementarity-based prioritization procedures were used to identify combinations of areas and sites with maximal species representation.

• Comparison of resolution of methods used in mapping biodiversity patterns from point-occurrence data. – Stockwell D., A. Townsend Peterson, (2003). Ecological Indicators 3 (2003) 213 221.
  
  Evaluates common methods of building community level descriptions from species data.

• Future projections for Mexican faunas under global climate change scenarios. – A. Townsend Peterson, Miguel A. Ortega-Huerta, Jeremy Bartley, Victor Sánchez-Cordero, Jorge Soberón, Robert H. Buddemeier, David R. B. Stockwell, Nature 416, 626 – 629 (11 Apr 2002) Letters to Nature.
  
  A way of using niche modeling to model community responses to climate change.