Abstract

Our knowledge of species diversity in deep-sea chemosynthetic communities has come a long way since their discovery in the late 1970s, However, their study poses serious challenges that are linked to their remoteness, the variable selectivity and effectiveness of sampling tools in different conditions, a lack of consensus on the size compartments and sieve size used in practice, and the persistent discovery of species that are previously unknown to science. Still, with increasing accessibility and new sampling tools, quantitative data are becoming both more frequent and extensive, reducing limitations in the estimation and comparison of species diversity. Here, we review the literature for common difficulties encountered in the measurement and comparison of species diversity within and among deep-sea chemosynthetic communities. We lay out recommendations for future and ongoing work that should lead to more accurate evaluations and more robust comparisons. We advocate: (1) complete transparency in the taxonomic levels used to compute reported diversity measures and public access to data tables after publication; (2) an effort to standardize size compartments and sieves used within the research community; (3) the use of families of species diversity measures that allow for differential weighting of abundant and rare species; (4) the evaluation of the completeness of inventories and the stability of all diversity measures for all groups of samples under comparison; and (5) caution in the use and interpretation of statistical tests on species diversity. Only through appropriate tools can we hope to gain the knowledge and understanding necessary for the management and protection of the often endemic fauna found in deep-sea chemosynthetic communities.

Highlights

  • Describing, explaining and modelling patterns of biological diversity is one of the major challenges facing ecologists today

  • Their study poses serious challenges that are linked to their remoteness, the variable selectivity and effectiveness of sampling tools in different conditions, a lack of consensus on the size compartments and sieve size used in practice, and the persistent discovery of species that are previously unknown to science

  • We advocate: (1) complete transparency in the taxonomic levels used to compute reported diversity measures and public access to data tables after publication; (2) an effort to standardize size compartments and sieves used within the research community; (3) the use of families of species diversity measures that allow for differential weighting of abundant and rare species; (4) the evaluation of the completeness of inventories and the stability of all diversity measures for all groups of samples under comparison; and (5) caution in the use and interpretation of statistical tests on species diversity

Read more

Summary

INTRODUCTION

Describing, explaining and modelling patterns of biological diversity is one of the major challenges facing ecologists today. Despite substantial advances in the sampling, processing, and analysis of data, researchers are still confronted with problems when engaging in this task This is true for deepsea chemosynthetic habitats that are characterized by difficult access and scarcity of data, and for which unknown species are commonly found in surveys, especially in the smaller size-components In order to be reliable, species diversity comparisons have to consider sampling method, mesh size, the number of samples, the number of individuals, the survey area, and the area or volume covered Since such discrepancies are often ignored or not deemed sufficient to warrant concern, we consider it necessary to briefly review some of the methods, tools and requirements of species diversity research in their application to research in deep-sea chemosynthetic communities. We hope that this work will trigger constructive discussion, and lead to higher quality descriptions and comparisons of the species diversity in these peculiar habitats, both within and between studies

Some obligatory symbolism
Epibenthic and infauna Epibenthic and infauna Epibenthic and infauna
Sobs pA pB pC pD
Shannon diversity index
The effective number of species
Sample coverage
Coring deeper
Ampharetid A
PROFILING DIVERSITY
All samples
Profiles in practice
Rarefying profiles
Bias Bias
THE MEANING OF DIFFERENCES
CONCLUSION
Findings
LITERATURE CITED
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call