Using historical data to detect temporal changes in the abundances of intertidal species on Irish shores

By C. Simkanin, A. Power, A. Myers, D. Mcgrath, A. Southward, N. Mieszkowska, R. Leaper, R. O'riordan. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 2005

109 citations recorded by the source corpus.

An historical data set, collected in 1958 by Southward and Crisp, was used as a baseline for detecting change in the abundances of species in the rocky intertidal of Ireland. In 2003, the abundances of each of 27 species was assessed using the same methodologies (ACFOR [which stands for the categories: abundant, common, frequent, occasional and rare] abundance scales) at 63 shores examined in the historical study. Comparison of the ACFOR data over a 45-year period, between the historical survey and re-survey, showed statistically significant changes in the abundances of 12 of the 27 species examined. Two species (one classed as northern and one introduced) increased significantly in abundance while ten species (five classed as northern, one classed as southern and four broadly distributed) decreased in abundance. The possible reasons for the changes in species abundances were assessed not only in the context of anthropogenic effects, such as climate change and commercial exploitation, but also of operator error. The error or differences recorded among operators (i.e. research scientists) when assessing species abundance using ACFOR categories was quantified on four shores. Significant change detected in three of the 12 species fell within the margin of operator error. This effect of operator may have also contributed to the results of no change in the other 15 species between the two census periods. It was not possible to determine the effect of operator on our results, which can increase the occurrence of a false positive (Type 1) or of a false negative (Type 2) outcome.

Subfields: Ecology, Global and Planetary Change, Oceanography

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1cd2f3bc77bf7476604af5eadb6b9e5487fd72bf

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

  1. Dan A. Smale
  2. T. Wernberg
  3. David S. Wethey
  4. O. Hoegh‐Guldberg
  5. Anthony J. Richardson
  6. R. Babcock
  7. T. Okey
  8. T. Kunz

In Global and Planetary Change

  1. O. Hoegh‐Guldberg
  2. Dan A. Smale
  3. Anthony J. Richardson
  4. Sarah A. Woodin
  5. R. Babcock
  6. T. Okey
  7. E. Poloczanska
  8. David S. Wethey

In Oceanography

  1. T. Wernberg
  2. Dan A. Smale
  3. E. Poloczanska
  4. David S. Wethey
  5. A. Hobday
  6. O. Hoegh‐Guldberg
  7. Anthony J. Richardson
  8. Sarah A. Woodin

Citations in the corpus