首页> 外文OA文献 >Estimation of regional richness in marine benthic communities: quantifying the error
【2h】

Estimation of regional richness in marine benthic communities: quantifying the error

机译:海洋底栖生物群落区域丰富度估计:量化误差

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Species richness is the most widely used measure of biodiversity. It is considered crucial for testing numerous ecological theories. While local species richness is easily determined by sampling, the quantification of regional richness relies on more or less complete species inventories, expert estimation, or mathematical extrapolation from a number of replicated local samplings. However the accuracy of such extrapolations is rarely known. In this study, we compare the common estimators MM (Michaelis-Menten), Chao1, Chao2, ACE (Abundance-based Coverage Estimator), and the first and second order Jackknifes against the asymptote of the species accumulation curve, which we use as an estimate of true regional richness. Subsequently, we quantified the role of sample size, i.e., number of replicates, for precision, accuracy, and bias of the estimation. These replicates were sub-sets of three large data sets of benthic assemblages from the NE Atlantic: (i) soft-bottom sediment communities in the Western Baltic (n = 70); (ii) hard-bottom communities from emergent rock on the Island of Helgoland, North Sea (n = 52), and (iii) hardbottom assemblages grown on artificial substrata in Madeira Island, Portugal (n = 56). For all community types, Jack2 showed a better performance in terms of bias and accuracy while MM exhibited the highest precision. However, in virtually all cases and across all sampling efforts, the estimators underestimated the regional species richness, regardless\udof habitat type, or selected estimator. Generally, the amount of underestimation decreased with sampling effort.\udA logarithmic function was applied to quantify the bias caused by low replication using the best estimator, Jack2.\udThe bias was more obvious in the soft-bottom environment, followed by the natural hard-bottom and the artificial\udhard-bottom habitats, respectively. If a weaker estimator in terms of performance is chosen for this quantification,\udmore replicates are required to obtain a reliable estimation of regional richness.
机译:物种丰富度是最广泛使用的生物多样性衡量标准。它被认为对检验众多生态学理论至关重要。尽管可以通过采样轻松确定本地物种的丰富度,但对区域丰富度的量化则取决于或多或少完整的物种清单,专家估计或大量重复本地采样的数学推断。然而,这种外推的准确性鲜为人知。在这项研究中,我们将常见的估计量MM(Michaelis-Menten),Chao1,Chao2,ACE(基于丰度的覆盖率估计量)以及一阶和二阶折刀与物种积累曲线的渐近线进行比较,我们将其用作真实区域富裕程度的估算。随后,我们量化了样本大小(即重复次数)对于估计的准确性,准确性和偏差的作用。这些复制品是来自东北大西洋的三个底栖动物大数据集的子集:(i)波罗的海西部的软底沉积物群落(n = 70); (ii)来自北海黑尔戈兰岛(Helgoland Island)上出现的岩石的硬底群落(n = 52),以及(iii)在葡萄牙马德拉岛(Madeira Island)的人工基质上生长的硬底群落(n = 56)。对于所有社区类型,Jack2在偏差和准确性方面均表现出更好的性能,而MM表现出最高的精度。但是,在几乎所有情况下以及在所有抽样工作中,无论生境类型或选定的估算器为何,估算器都低估了区域物种的丰富度。通常,低估量会随着采样工作的减少而减少。\ ud使用对数函数来量化使用最佳估计器Jack2的低复制引起的偏倚。\ ud偏斜在软底环境中更为明显,其次是自然硬底部和人工\超硬底部栖息地。如果为量化选择性能较弱的估算器,则需要进行更多重复才能获得对区域丰富度的可靠估算。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

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