...
首页> 外文期刊>Ecological indicators >Comparing disturbance gradients and bird-based indices of biotic integrity for ranking the ecological integrity of Great Lakes coastal wetlands
【24h】

Comparing disturbance gradients and bird-based indices of biotic integrity for ranking the ecological integrity of Great Lakes coastal wetlands

机译:比较干扰梯度和基于鸟类的生物完整性指数,以对大湖沿岸湿地的生态完整性进行排名

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

We compared different methods for generating indices of biotic integrity (IBIs) for Great Lakes coastal wetlands using bird community data collected by participants in Bird Studies Canada's Great Lakes Marsh Monitoring Program (GLMMP) including: rank sum and multivariate approaches for defining landscape disturbance gradients; and generalist-specialist (IBI-1), multimetric (IBI-2), and probabilistic (IBI-3) approaches for calculating IBIs. Scores from the multivariate disturbance gradient, IBI-1, and IBI-3 increased rapidly at the impaired and unimpaired ends of the impaired-to-unimpaired spectrum, whereas scores from the rank sum disturbance gradient and IBI-2 increased rapidly only at the unimpaired end. IBIs with metrics that both increased and decreased along the landscape disturbance gradient were more sensitive for identifying especially impaired and unimpaired sites (i.e., IBI-1 and IBI-3) compared to IBIs with metrics that only increased (i.e., IBI-2). Scores from all but one of the IBIs were significantly correlated with scores of at least one of the landscape disturbance gradients and scores from all three of the IBIs were significantly moderately correlated with each other (r(s) = 0.3-0.7). Site ranks arranged from impaired to unimpaired differed by 25-50 positions out of 142 possible positions depending on the pair of IBIs chosen. Much of the variation that we observed could be explained by differences among IBIs in the metrics that contributed most to impaired and unimpaired sites. Thus, we recommend the following not only for IBI users assessing the integrity of Great Lakes coastal wetlands, but also any other ecosystem where multiple landscape disturbance gradients and IBIs are available for use: (1) use multivariate instead of rank sum approaches for defining landscape disturbance gradients; (2) use IBIs with metrics that both increase and decrease along the landscape disturbance gradient instead of IBIs with metrics that only increase or only decrease; and (3) ensure that site-level species lists are reasonably complete, particularly for species that disproportionately contribute to especially impaired and unimpaired scores. Following these guidelines will increase the sensitivity and accuracy of IBIs for identifying especially impaired and unimpaired sites and ultimately result in better conservation. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
机译:我们比较了使用加拿大鸟类研究大湖沼泽监测计划(GLMMP)参与者收集的鸟类群落数据生成大湖沿海湿地生物完整性指数(IBI)的不同方法,包括:等级和和用于定义景观扰动梯度的多元方法;以及用于计算IBI的通用专家(IBI-1),多度量(IBI-2)和概率(IBI-3)方法。多元扰动梯度,IBI-1和IBI-3的得分在受损至未受损频谱的受损端和未受损端迅速增加,而秩和干扰梯度和IBI-2的得分仅在未受损者的范围内迅速增长结束。与仅增加指标(即IBI-2)的IBI相比,具有沿景观扰动梯度增加和减少的指标的IBI对识别特别受损和未受损的地点(即IBI-1和IBI-3)更敏感。除一个IBI以外的所有得分均与至少一个景观扰动梯度的得分显着相关,而所有三个IBI的得分彼此均呈中等程度的相关性(r(s)= 0.3-0.7)。根据所选择的IBI对,从受损到未受损的站点等级在142个可能的位置中相差25-50个位置。我们观察到的大部分差异可以通过IBI的指标差异来解释,这些指标对受损和未受损的站点贡献最大。因此,我们不仅建议IBI用户评估大湖沿岸湿地的完整性,还建议使用以下其他可使用多种景观扰动梯度和IBI的生态系统:(1)使用多元变量而不是秩和法来定义景观干扰梯度(2)使用具有沿景观扰动梯度增加和减小的指标的IBI来代替仅具有增加或仅减小的指标的IBI; (3)确保站点级别的物种清单合理完整,尤其是对于那些对受损和未受损得分特别重要的物种而言。遵循这些准则将提高IBI在识别特别受损和未受损场所时的敏感性和准确性,并最终导致更好的保护。 (C)2015 Elsevier Ltd.保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号