Abstract

Changes in biodiversity today shape the future patterns of biodiversity. This fact underlines the importance of understanding changes in biodiversity through time and space. The number of species, known as species richness, has long been studied as a key indicator that quantifies the state of biodiversity, and standardisation techniques, called rarefaction, have also been used to undertake a fair comparison of the richness observed at different times or locations. The present study asks whether utilising different rarefaction techniques attains comparable results when investigating changes in species richness. The study framework presents the statistical nature of two commonly adopted rarefaction techniques: size-based and coverage-based rarefaction. The key finding is that the rarefied richness results calculated by these two different rarefaction methods reflect different aspects of biodiversity change, the shift in community size and/or composition. This fact illuminates that richness analyses based on different rarefaction techniques can reach different conclusions that may be contradictory. The study also investigates the mechanism creating such divergence. As such, special care is required when evaluating biodiversity change using species richness as an indicator.

Highlights

  • Growing concern about biodiversity change highlights the pressing need for an improved understanding of the nature of this change as changes in the present shapeB Hideyasu ShimadzuH

  • The current study focuses on examining the temporal trend of richness, and the gradient of conditional richness over time is investigated for each rarefaction technique

  • The present study has revealed that the analysis of richness change can delineate the different aspects of biodiversity change depending on the types of rarefaction technique employed; in other words, the result depends upon the sampling fraction induced by the rarefaction

Read more

Summary

B Hideyasu Shimadzu

The present study stresses that comprehending the statistical nature of these common rarefaction techniques is a crucial step towards enhancing the knowledge of the types of biodiversity change that are currently being quantified and discussed. The remainder of the paper presents new insights into the analysis of richness change, asking whether the utility of different rarefaction techniques acquires comparable results. 2. Conditional richness expresses the statistical nature of rarefaction techniques in a formal manner, specifying the rarefaction mechanism as a type of simple random sampling The trends of rarefied richness produced by the two different rarefaction techniques reflect, ecologically different aspects of biodiversity. This finding means that richness analyses based on different rarefaction techniques can reach conflicting conclusions. A numerical simulation is performed in Sect. 6 and exhibits an agreement with the theoretical results, illuminating the mechanism that creates the divergence between these two different rarefaction techniques

Richness
Ecological communities
The distribution of observed abundances
The species abundance distribution
A link between richness and conditional richness
Rarefaction techniques
Components of richness change
An illustrative example
Simulation setup
Results
Discussion and concluding remarks
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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