2007The American NaturalistRequires access

Effects of Sample Standardization on Mean Species Detectabilities and Estimates of Relative Differences in Species Richness among Assemblages

Cao, Hawkins, Larsen, Van Sickle

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

Ecological surveys provide the basic information needed to estimate differences in species richness among assemblages. Comparable estimates of the differences in richness between assemblages require equal mean species detectabilities across assemblages. However, mean species detectabilities are often unknown, typically low, and potentially different from one assemblage to another. As a result, inferences regarding differences in species richness among assemblages can be biased. We evaluated how well three methods used to produce comparable estimates of species richness achieved equal mean species detectabilities across diverse assemblages: rarefaction, statistical estimators, and standardization of sampling effort on mean taxonomic similarity among replicate samples (MRS). We used simulated assemblages to mimic a wide range of species‐occurrence distributions and species richness to compare the performance of these three methods. Inferences regarding differences in species richness based on rarefaction were highly biased when richness estimates were compared among assemblages with distinctly different species‐occurrence distributions. Statistical estimators only marginally reduced this bias. Standardization on MRS yielded the most comparable estimates of differences in species richness. These findings have important implications for our understanding of species‐richness patterns, inferences drawn from biological monitoring data, and planning for biodiversity conservation.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Ecological surveys provide the basic information needed to estimate differences in species richness among assemblages. Comparable estimates of the differences in richness between assemblages require equal mean species detectabilities across assemblages. However, mean species detectabilities are often unknown, typically low, and potentially different from one assemblage to another. As a result, inferences regarding differences in species richness among assemblages can be biased. We evaluated how well three methods used to produce comparable estimates of species richness achieved equal mean species detectabilities across diverse assemblages: rarefaction, statistical estimators, and standardization of sampling effort on mean taxonomic similarity among replicate samples (MRS). We used simulated assemblages to mimic a wide range of species‐occurrence distributions and species richness to compare the performance of these three methods. Inferences regarding differences in species richness based on rarefaction were highly biased when richness estimates were compared among assemblages with distinctly different species‐occurrence distributions. Statistical estimators only marginally reduced this bias. Standardization on MRS yielded the most comparable estimates of differences in species richness. These findings have important implications for our understanding of species‐richness patterns, inferences drawn from biological monitoring data, and planning for biodiversity conservation.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Ecological surveys provide the basic information needed to estimate differences in species richness among assemblages. Comparable estimates of the differences in richness between assemblages require equal mean species detectabilities across assemblages. However, mean species detectabilities are often unknown, typically low, and potentially different from one assemblage to another. As a result, inferences regarding differences in species richness among assemblages can be biased. We evaluated how well three methods used to produce comparable estimates of species richness achieved equal mean species detectabilities across diverse assemblages: rarefaction, statistical estimators, and standardization of sampling effort on mean taxonomic similarity among replicate samples (MRS). We used simulated assemblages to mimic a wide range of species‐occurrence distributions and species richness to compare the performance of these three methods. Inferences regarding differences in species richness based on rarefaction were highly biased when richness estimates were compared among assemblages with distinctly different species‐occurrence distributions. Statistical estimators only marginally reduced this bias. Standardization on MRS yielded the most comparable estimates of differences in species richness. These findings have important implications for our understanding of species‐richness patterns, inferences drawn from biological monitoring data, and planning for biodiversity conservation.

Key concepts: Species richness, Rarefaction (ecology), Body size and species richness, Ecology, Biodiversity, Species diversity, Range (aeronautics), Biology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Effects of Sample Standardization on Mean Species Detectabilities and Estimates of Relative Differences in Species Richness among Assemblages — Research Paper | ScholarLens