Assessing the suitability of diversity metrics to detect biodiversity change

By L. Santini, J. Belmaker, Mark John Costello, Henrique M. Pereira, A. Rossberg, Aafke M. Schipper, Silvia Ceaușu, M. Dornelas, J. Hilbers, Joaquín Hortal and 5 more. 2017

158 citations recorded by the source corpus.

A large number of diversity metrics are available to study and monitor biodiversity, and their responses to biodiversity changes are not necessarily coherent with each other. The choice of biodiversity metrics may thus strongly affect our interpretation of biodiversity change and, hence, prioritization of resources for conservation. Therefore it is crucial to understand which metrics respond to certain changes, are the most sensitive to change, show consistent responses across different communities, detect early signals of species decline, and are insensitive to demographic stochasticity. Here we generated synthetic communities and simulated changes in their composition according to 9 scenarios of biodiversity change to investigate the behaviour of 12 biodiversity metrics. Metrics showed diverse abilities to detect changes under different scenarios. Sorensen similarity index, arithmetic and geometric mean abundance, and species and functional richness were the most sensitive to community changes. Sorensen similarity index, species richness and geometric abundance showed consistent responses across all simulated communities and scenarios. Sorensen similarity index and geometric mean abundance were able to detect early signals of species decline. Geometric mean abundance, and functional evenness under certain scenarios, had the greatest ability to distinguish directional trends from stochastic changes, but Sorensen similarity index and geometric mean abundance were the only indices to show consistent signals under all replicates and scenarios. Classic abundance-weighted heterogeneity indices (e.g. Shannon index) were insensitive to certain changes or showed misleading responses, and are therefore unsuitable for comparison of biological communities. We therefore suggest that separate metrics of species composition, richness, and abundance should be reported instead of (or in addition to) composite metrics like the Shannon index.

Subfields: Ecological Modeling, Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f3f12759b4437045f74be7f98b17ca3b6bb6fd60

How researchers see this paper

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

In Ecological Modeling

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

TetraDENSITY: A database of population density estimates in terrestrial vertebrates (2018, background): “Changes in population density are significant for purposes of biodiversity monitoring (Collen et al., 2009; Santini et al., 2017).”
Temporal β diversity—A macroecological perspective (2019, background): “These considerations apply equally to the quantification of biodiversity change (Anderson et al., 2011; Dornelas et al., 2014; Dornelas et al., 2013; Hillebrand et al., 2017; Santini et al., 2017), which is an expression of change”