Navigating the multiple meanings of β diversity: a roadmap for the practicing ecologist (original) (raw)
Related papers
A recent increase in studies of b diversity has yielded a confusing array of concepts, measures and methods. Here, we provide a roadmap of the most widely used and ecologically relevant approaches for analysis through a series of mission statements. We distinguish two types of b diversity: directional turnover along a gradient vs. non-directional variation. Different measures emphasize different properties of ecological data. Such properties include the degree of emphasis on presence ⁄ absence vs. relative abundance information and the inclusion vs. exclusion of joint absences. Judicious use of multiple measures in concert can uncover the underlying nature of patterns in b diversity for a given dataset. A case study of Indonesian coral assemblages shows the utility of a multi-faceted approach. We advocate careful consideration of relevant questions, matched by appropriate analyses. The rigorous application of null models will also help to reveal potential processes driving observed patterns in b diversity.
Measuring β-diversity with species abundance data
The Journal of animal ecology, 2015
In 2003, 24 presence-absence β-diversity metrics were reviewed and a number of trade-offs and redundancies identified. We present a parallel investigation into the performance of abundance-based metrics of β-diversity. β-diversity is a multi-faceted concept, central to spatial ecology. There are multiple metrics available to quantify it: the choice of metric is an important decision. We test 16 conceptual properties and two sampling properties of a β-diversity metric: metrics should be 1) independent of α-diversity and 2) cumulative along a gradient of species turnover. Similarity should be 3) probabilistic when assemblages are independently and identically distributed. Metrics should have 4) a minimum of zero and increase monotonically with the degree of 5) species turnover, 6) decoupling of species ranks and 7) evenness differences. However, complete species turnover should always generate greater values of β than extreme 8) rank shifts or 9) evenness differences. Metrics should 1...
Measuring beta-diversity with abundance data
1. In 2003, 24 presence-absence b-diversity metrics were reviewed and a number of trade-offs and redundancies identified. We present a parallel investigation into the performance of abundance-based metrics of b-diversity. 2. b-diversity is a multi-faceted concept, central to spatial ecology. There are multiple metrics available to quantify it: the choice of metric is an important decision. 3. We test 16 conceptual properties and two sampling properties of a b-diversity metric: metrics should be 1) independent of a-diversity and 2) cumulative along a gradient of species turnover. Similarity should be 3) probabilistic when assemblages are independently and identically distributed. Metrics should have 4) a minimum of zero and increase monotonically with the degree of 5) species turnover, 6) decoupling of species ranks and 7) evenness differences. However, complete species turnover should always generate greater values of b than extreme 8) rank shifts or 9) evenness differences. Metrics should 10) have a fixed upper limit, 11) symmetry (b A,B = b B,A ), 12) double-zero asymmetry for double absences and double presences and 13) not decrease in a series of nested assemblages. Additionally, metrics should be independent of 14) species replication 15) the units of abundance and 16) differences in total abundance between sampling units. When samples are used to infer b-diversity, metrics should be 1) independent of sample sizes and 2) independent of unequal sample sizes. We test 29 metrics for these properties and five 'personality' properties. 4. Thirteen metrics were outperformed or equalled across all conceptual and sampling properties. Differences in sensitivity to species' abundance lead to a performance trade-off between sample size bias and the ability to detect turnover among rare species. In general, abundancebased metrics are substantially less biased in the face of undersampling, although the presence-absence metric, b sim , performed well overall. Only b Baselga R turn , b Baselga B-C turn and b sim measured purely species turnover and were independent of nestedness. Among the other metrics, sensitivity to nestedness varied >4-fold. 5. Our results indicate large amounts of redundancy among existing b-diversity metrics, whilst the estimation of unseen shared and unshared species is lacking and should be addressed in the design of new abundance-based metrics.
PeerJ
Estimating variability across spatial scales has been a major issue in ecology because the description of patterns in space is extremely valuable to propose specific hypotheses to unveil key processes behind these patterns. This paper aims to estimate the variability of the coral assemblage structure at different spatial scales in order to determine which scales explain the largest variability on β-diversity. For this, a fully-nested design including a series of hierarchical-random factors encompassing three spatial scales: (1) regions, (2) localities and (3) reefs sites across the Venezuelan territory. The variability among spatial scales was tested with a permutation-based analysis of variance (Permanova) based on Bray-Curtis index. Dispersion in species presence/absence across scales (i.e., β-diversity) was tested with a PermDisp analysis based on Jaccard’s index. We found the highest variability in the coral assemblage structure between sites within localities (Pseudo-F = 5.34; ...
Oecologia, 2009
Almost half a century after Whittaker (Ecol Monogr 30:279–338, 1960) proposed his influential diversity concept, it is time for a critical reappraisal. Although the terms alpha, beta and gamma diversity introduced by Whittaker have become general textbook knowledge, the concept suffers from several drawbacks. First, alpha and gamma diversity share the same characteristics and are differentiated only by the scale at which they are applied. However, as scale is relative––depending on the organism(s) or ecosystems investigated––this is not a meaningful ecological criterion. Alpha and gamma diversity can instead be grouped together under the term “inventory diversity.” Out of the three levels proposed by Whittaker, beta diversity is the one which receives the most contradictory comments regarding its usefulness (“key concept” vs. “abstruse concept”). Obviously beta diversity means different things to different people. Apart from the large variety of methods used to investigate it, the main reason for this may be different underlying data characteristics. A literature review reveals that the multitude of measures used to assess beta diversity can be sorted into two conceptually different groups. The first group directly takes species distinction into account and compares the similarity of sites (similarity indices, slope of the distance decay relationship, length of the ordination axis, and sum of squares of a species matrix). The second group relates species richness (or other summary diversity measures) of two (or more) different scales to each other (additive and multiplicative partitioning). Due to that important distinction, we suggest that beta diversity should be split into two levels, “differentiation diversity” (first group) and “proportional diversity” (second group). Thus, we propose to use the terms “inventory diversity” for within-sample diversity, “differentiation diversity” for compositional similarity between samples, and “proportional diversity” for the comparison of inventory diversity across spatial and temporal scales.
The limitations of diversity metrics in directing global marine conservation
Marine Policy, 2014
Biodiversity hotspots have been used extensively in setting conservation priorities for marine ecosystems. A recent Nature publication claims to have uncovered new latitudinal gradients in the evenness of reef communities and new reef hotspots based on functional diversity. Simulation models show that the purported evenness gradient is a mathematical inevitability of differences in species richness and detectability between vastly different marine ecosystems, namely 'reefs' in tropical, temperate, and polar regions. Constraints on evenness, along with disparity amongst communities in possible functional traits, cast doubt on the utility of global functional diversity comparisons for management of marine systems.
Coral reef diversity refutes the neutral theory of biodiversity
Nature, 2006
The global decline of coral reefs 1,2 highlights the need to understand the mechanisms that regulate community structure and sustain biodiversity in these systems. The neutral theory, which assumes that individuals are demographically identical regardless of species, seeks to explain ubiquitous features of community structure and biodiversity patterns 3-5 . Here we present a test of neutral-theory predictions with the use of an extensive specieslevel data set of Indo-Pacific coral communities. We show that coral assemblages differ markedly from neutral-model predictions for patterns of community similarity and the relative abundance of species. Within local communities, neutral models do not fit relative abundance distributions as well as the classical log-normal distribution. Relative abundances of species across local communities also differ markedly from neutral-theory predictions: coral communities exhibit community similarity values that are far more variable, and lower on average, than the neutral theory can produce. Empirical community similarities deviate from the neutral model in a direction opposite to that predicted in previous critiques of the neutral theory 6-9 . Instead, our results support spatio-temporal environmental stochasticity as a major driver of diversity patterns on coral reefs 10,11 .