dc.contributor.author
Morris, E. Kathryn
dc.contributor.author
Caruso, Tancredi
dc.contributor.author
Buscot, François
dc.contributor.author
Fischer, Markus
dc.contributor.author
Hancock, Christine
dc.contributor.author
Maier, Tanja S.
dc.contributor.author
Meiners, Torsten
dc.contributor.author
Müller, Caroline
dc.contributor.author
Obermaier, Elisabeth
dc.contributor.author
Prati, Daniel
dc.contributor.author
Socher, Stephanie A.
dc.contributor.author
Sonnemann, Ilja
dc.contributor.author
Wäschke, Nicole
dc.contributor.author
Wubet, Tesfaye
dc.contributor.author
Wurst, Susanne
dc.contributor.author
Rillig, Matthias C.
dc.date.accessioned
2018-06-08T04:05:34Z
dc.date.available
2014-11-12T15:36:26.718Z
dc.identifier.uri
https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/16560
dc.identifier.uri
http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-20741
dc.description.abstract
Biodiversity, a multidimensional property of natural systems, is difficult to
quantify partly because of the multitude of indices proposed for this purpose.
Indices aim to describe general properties of communities that allow us to
compare different regions, taxa, and trophic levels. Therefore, they are of
fundamental importance for environmental monitoring and conservation, although
there is no consensus about which indices are more appropriate and
informative. We tested several common diversity indices in a range of simple
to complex statistical analyses in order to determine whether some were better
suited for certain analyses than others. We used data collected around the
focal plant Plantago lanceolata on 60 temperate grassland plots embedded in an
agricultural landscape to explore relationships between the common diversity
indices of species richness (S), Shannon's diversity (H'), Simpson's diversity
(D1), Simpson's dominance (D2), Simpson's evenness (E), and Berger–Parker
dominance (BP). We calculated each of these indices for herbaceous plants,
arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi, aboveground arthropods, belowground insect
larvae, and P. lanceolata molecular and chemical diversity. Including these
trait-based measures of diversity allowed us to test whether or not they
behaved similarly to the better studied species diversity. We used path
analysis to determine whether compound indices detected more relationships
between diversities of different organisms and traits than more basic indices.
In the path models, more paths were significant when using H', even though all
models except that with E were equally reliable. This demonstrates that while
common diversity indices may appear interchangeable in simple analyses, when
considering complex interactions, the choice of index can profoundly alter the
interpretation of results. Data mining in order to identify the index
producing the most significant results should be avoided, but simultaneously
considering analyses using multiple indices can provide greater insight into
the interactions in a system.
en
dc.rights.uri
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
dc.subject.ddc
500 Naturwissenschaften und Mathematik::590 Tiere (Zoologie)
dc.title
Choosing and using diversity indices
dc.type
Wissenschaftlicher Artikel
dcterms.bibliographicCitation
Ecology and Evolution. - 4 (2014), 18, S. 3514-3524
dc.title.subtitle
insights for ecological applications from the German Biodiversity
Exploratories
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.doi
10.1002/ece3.1155
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.url
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.1155
refubium.affiliation
Biologie, Chemie, Pharmazie
de
refubium.mycore.fudocsId
FUDOCS_document_000000021272
refubium.note.author
Der Artikel wurde in einer Open-Access-Zeitschrift publiziert.
refubium.resourceType.isindependentpub
no
refubium.mycore.derivateId
FUDOCS_derivate_000000004137
dcterms.accessRights.openaire
open access