Estimating species richness

Sensitivity to sample coverage and insensitivity to spatial patterns

Ulrich Brose, Neo D Martinez, Richard J. Williams

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

238 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The number of species in an area is critical to the development of evolutionary and ecological theory from mass extinctions to island biogeography. Still, the factors influencing the accuracy of estimators of species richness are poorly understood. We explored these factors by simulating landscapes that varied in species richness, relative abundances, and the spatial distribution. We compared the extrapolations of nine nonparametric estimators and two species accumulation curves under three sampling intensities. Community evenness of species' abundances, sampling intensity, and the level of true species richness significantly influenced bias, precision, and accuracy of the estimations. Perhaps most surprisingly, the effects of gradient strength and spatial autocorrelation type were generally insignificant. The nonparametric estimators were substantially less biased and more precise than the species accumulation curves. Observed species richness was most biased. Community evenness, sampling intensity, and the level of true species richness influenced the performance of the nonparametric estimators indirectly via the fraction of all species found in a sample or "sample coverage." For each particular level of sample coverage, a single estimator was most accurate. Choice of estimator is confounded by a priori uncertainty about the sample coverage. Accordingly, researchers can extrapolate species richness by various estimators and base the estimator choice on the mean estimated sample coverage. Alternatively, the most reliable estimator with respect to community evenness can be chosen. These predictions from our simulations are confirmed in two field studies.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2364-2377
Number of pages14
JournalEcology
Volume84
Issue number9
StatePublished - Sep 2003
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

species richness
species diversity
sampling
island biogeography
evolutionary theory
ecological theory
mass extinction
autocorrelation
relative abundance
spatial distribution
extinction
uncertainty
biogeography
researchers
prediction
simulation

Keywords

  • Biodiversity
  • Estimations
  • Extrapolations
  • Gradients
  • Jacknife estimators
  • Nonparametric estimators
  • Relative abundance distribution
  • Sample coverage
  • Spatial autocorrelation
  • Species accumulation curves

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ecology

Cite this

Estimating species richness : Sensitivity to sample coverage and insensitivity to spatial patterns. / Brose, Ulrich; Martinez, Neo D; Williams, Richard J.

In: Ecology, Vol. 84, No. 9, 09.2003, p. 2364-2377.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Brose, Ulrich ; Martinez, Neo D ; Williams, Richard J. / Estimating species richness : Sensitivity to sample coverage and insensitivity to spatial patterns. In: Ecology. 2003 ; Vol. 84, No. 9. pp. 2364-2377.
@article{804363bbeabc48558b6156d3cefb106a,
title = "Estimating species richness: Sensitivity to sample coverage and insensitivity to spatial patterns",
abstract = "The number of species in an area is critical to the development of evolutionary and ecological theory from mass extinctions to island biogeography. Still, the factors influencing the accuracy of estimators of species richness are poorly understood. We explored these factors by simulating landscapes that varied in species richness, relative abundances, and the spatial distribution. We compared the extrapolations of nine nonparametric estimators and two species accumulation curves under three sampling intensities. Community evenness of species' abundances, sampling intensity, and the level of true species richness significantly influenced bias, precision, and accuracy of the estimations. Perhaps most surprisingly, the effects of gradient strength and spatial autocorrelation type were generally insignificant. The nonparametric estimators were substantially less biased and more precise than the species accumulation curves. Observed species richness was most biased. Community evenness, sampling intensity, and the level of true species richness influenced the performance of the nonparametric estimators indirectly via the fraction of all species found in a sample or {"}sample coverage.{"} For each particular level of sample coverage, a single estimator was most accurate. Choice of estimator is confounded by a priori uncertainty about the sample coverage. Accordingly, researchers can extrapolate species richness by various estimators and base the estimator choice on the mean estimated sample coverage. Alternatively, the most reliable estimator with respect to community evenness can be chosen. These predictions from our simulations are confirmed in two field studies.",
keywords = "Biodiversity, Estimations, Extrapolations, Gradients, Jacknife estimators, Nonparametric estimators, Relative abundance distribution, Sample coverage, Spatial autocorrelation, Species accumulation curves",
author = "Ulrich Brose and Martinez, {Neo D} and Williams, {Richard J.}",
year = "2003",
month = "9",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "84",
pages = "2364--2377",
journal = "Ecology",
issn = "0012-9658",
publisher = "Ecological Society of America",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Estimating species richness

T2 - Sensitivity to sample coverage and insensitivity to spatial patterns

AU - Brose, Ulrich

AU - Martinez, Neo D

AU - Williams, Richard J.

PY - 2003/9

Y1 - 2003/9

N2 - The number of species in an area is critical to the development of evolutionary and ecological theory from mass extinctions to island biogeography. Still, the factors influencing the accuracy of estimators of species richness are poorly understood. We explored these factors by simulating landscapes that varied in species richness, relative abundances, and the spatial distribution. We compared the extrapolations of nine nonparametric estimators and two species accumulation curves under three sampling intensities. Community evenness of species' abundances, sampling intensity, and the level of true species richness significantly influenced bias, precision, and accuracy of the estimations. Perhaps most surprisingly, the effects of gradient strength and spatial autocorrelation type were generally insignificant. The nonparametric estimators were substantially less biased and more precise than the species accumulation curves. Observed species richness was most biased. Community evenness, sampling intensity, and the level of true species richness influenced the performance of the nonparametric estimators indirectly via the fraction of all species found in a sample or "sample coverage." For each particular level of sample coverage, a single estimator was most accurate. Choice of estimator is confounded by a priori uncertainty about the sample coverage. Accordingly, researchers can extrapolate species richness by various estimators and base the estimator choice on the mean estimated sample coverage. Alternatively, the most reliable estimator with respect to community evenness can be chosen. These predictions from our simulations are confirmed in two field studies.

AB - The number of species in an area is critical to the development of evolutionary and ecological theory from mass extinctions to island biogeography. Still, the factors influencing the accuracy of estimators of species richness are poorly understood. We explored these factors by simulating landscapes that varied in species richness, relative abundances, and the spatial distribution. We compared the extrapolations of nine nonparametric estimators and two species accumulation curves under three sampling intensities. Community evenness of species' abundances, sampling intensity, and the level of true species richness significantly influenced bias, precision, and accuracy of the estimations. Perhaps most surprisingly, the effects of gradient strength and spatial autocorrelation type were generally insignificant. The nonparametric estimators were substantially less biased and more precise than the species accumulation curves. Observed species richness was most biased. Community evenness, sampling intensity, and the level of true species richness influenced the performance of the nonparametric estimators indirectly via the fraction of all species found in a sample or "sample coverage." For each particular level of sample coverage, a single estimator was most accurate. Choice of estimator is confounded by a priori uncertainty about the sample coverage. Accordingly, researchers can extrapolate species richness by various estimators and base the estimator choice on the mean estimated sample coverage. Alternatively, the most reliable estimator with respect to community evenness can be chosen. These predictions from our simulations are confirmed in two field studies.

KW - Biodiversity

KW - Estimations

KW - Extrapolations

KW - Gradients

KW - Jacknife estimators

KW - Nonparametric estimators

KW - Relative abundance distribution

KW - Sample coverage

KW - Spatial autocorrelation

KW - Species accumulation curves

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0345016305&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0345016305&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 84

SP - 2364

EP - 2377

JO - Ecology

JF - Ecology

SN - 0012-9658

IS - 9

ER -