Sampling effort and information quality provided by rare and common species in estimating assemblage structure

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Sgarbi, Luciano F.
Data de Publicação: 2020
Outros Autores: Bini, Luis M., Heino, Jani, Jyrkänkallio-Mikkola, Jenny, Landeiro, Victor L., Santos, Edineusa P. [UNESP], Schneck, Fabiana, Siqueira, Tadeu [UNESP], Soininen, Janne, Tolonen, Kimmo T., Melo, Adriano S.
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNESP
Texto Completo: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105937
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/198194
Resumo: Reliable biological assessments are essential to answer ecological and management questions but require well-designed studies and representative sample sizes. However, large sampling effort is rarely possible, because it demands large financial resources and time, restricting the number of sites sampled, the duration of the study and the sampling effort at each site. In this context, we need methods and protocols allowing cost-effective surveys that would, consequently, increase the knowledge about how biodiversity is distributed in space and time. Here, we assessed the minimal sampling effort required to correctly estimate the assemblage structure of stream insects sampled in near-pristine boreal and subtropical regions. We used five methods grouped into two different approaches. The first approach consisted of the removal of individuals 1) randomly or 2) based on a count threshold. The second approach consisted of simplification in terms of 1) sequential removal from rare to common species; 2) sequential removal from common to rare species; and 3) random species removal. The reliability of the methods was assessed using Procrustes analysis, which indicated the correlation between a reduced matrix (after removal of individuals or species) and the complete matrix. In many cases, we found a strong relationship between ordination patterns derived from presence/absence data (the extreme count threshold of a single individual) and those patterns derived from abundance data. Also, major multivariate patterns derived from the complete data matrices were retained even after the random removal of more than half of the individuals. Procrustes correlation was generally high (>0.8), even with the removal of 50% of the species. Removal of common species produced lower correlation than removal of rare species, indicating higher importance of the former to estimate resemblance between assemblages. Thus, we conclude that sampling designs can be optimized by reducing the sampling effort at a site. We recommend that such efforts saved should be redirected to increase the number of sites studied and the duration of the studies, which is essential to encompass larger spatial, temporal and environmental extents, and increase our knowledge of biodiversity.
id UNSP_1719d3a45921cd455deed87b1573444c
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/198194
network_acronym_str UNSP
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository_id_str 2946
spelling Sampling effort and information quality provided by rare and common species in estimating assemblage structureBiological diversityCommunity ecologyMinimal sampling effortProcrustesStream insectsReliable biological assessments are essential to answer ecological and management questions but require well-designed studies and representative sample sizes. However, large sampling effort is rarely possible, because it demands large financial resources and time, restricting the number of sites sampled, the duration of the study and the sampling effort at each site. In this context, we need methods and protocols allowing cost-effective surveys that would, consequently, increase the knowledge about how biodiversity is distributed in space and time. Here, we assessed the minimal sampling effort required to correctly estimate the assemblage structure of stream insects sampled in near-pristine boreal and subtropical regions. We used five methods grouped into two different approaches. The first approach consisted of the removal of individuals 1) randomly or 2) based on a count threshold. The second approach consisted of simplification in terms of 1) sequential removal from rare to common species; 2) sequential removal from common to rare species; and 3) random species removal. The reliability of the methods was assessed using Procrustes analysis, which indicated the correlation between a reduced matrix (after removal of individuals or species) and the complete matrix. In many cases, we found a strong relationship between ordination patterns derived from presence/absence data (the extreme count threshold of a single individual) and those patterns derived from abundance data. Also, major multivariate patterns derived from the complete data matrices were retained even after the random removal of more than half of the individuals. Procrustes correlation was generally high (>0.8), even with the removal of 50% of the species. Removal of common species produced lower correlation than removal of rare species, indicating higher importance of the former to estimate resemblance between assemblages. Thus, we conclude that sampling designs can be optimized by reducing the sampling effort at a site. We recommend that such efforts saved should be redirected to increase the number of sites studied and the duration of the studies, which is essential to encompass larger spatial, temporal and environmental extents, and increase our knowledge of biodiversity.Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)Academy of FinlandConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia e Evolução Universidade Federal de GoiásDepartamento de Ecologia Universidade Federal de GoiásFinnish Environment Institute Freshwater CentreDepartment of Geosciences and Geography University of Helsinki, PO Box 64Departamento de Botânica e Ecologia Universidade Federal do Mato GrossoInstituto de Biociências Universidade Estadual Paulista UNESP, Rio ClaroInstituto de Ciências Biológicas Universidade Federal do Rio GrandeDepartment of Biological and Environmental Science University of Jyväskylä, P.O. Box 35Instituto de Biociências Universidade Estadual Paulista UNESP, Rio ClaroFAPESP: 2013/50424-1Academy of Finland: 273557Academy of Finland: 273560CNPq: 304314/2014-5CNPq: 307587/2017-7CNPq: 307961/2017-6Universidade Federal de Goiás (UFG)Freshwater CentreUniversity of HelsinkiUniversidade Federal do Mato GrossoUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)Universidade Federal do Rio GrandeUniversity of JyväskyläSgarbi, Luciano F.Bini, Luis M.Heino, JaniJyrkänkallio-Mikkola, JennyLandeiro, Victor L.Santos, Edineusa P. [UNESP]Schneck, FabianaSiqueira, Tadeu [UNESP]Soininen, JanneTolonen, Kimmo T.Melo, Adriano S.2020-12-12T01:06:11Z2020-12-12T01:06:11Z2020-03-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlehttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105937Ecological Indicators, v. 110.1470-160Xhttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/19819410.1016/j.ecolind.2019.1059372-s2.0-85075526049Scopusreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengEcological Indicatorsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2021-10-23T09:55:15Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/198194Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462024-08-05T19:12:48.217734Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Sampling effort and information quality provided by rare and common species in estimating assemblage structure
title Sampling effort and information quality provided by rare and common species in estimating assemblage structure
spellingShingle Sampling effort and information quality provided by rare and common species in estimating assemblage structure
Sgarbi, Luciano F.
Biological diversity
Community ecology
Minimal sampling effort
Procrustes
Stream insects
title_short Sampling effort and information quality provided by rare and common species in estimating assemblage structure
title_full Sampling effort and information quality provided by rare and common species in estimating assemblage structure
title_fullStr Sampling effort and information quality provided by rare and common species in estimating assemblage structure
title_full_unstemmed Sampling effort and information quality provided by rare and common species in estimating assemblage structure
title_sort Sampling effort and information quality provided by rare and common species in estimating assemblage structure
author Sgarbi, Luciano F.
author_facet Sgarbi, Luciano F.
Bini, Luis M.
Heino, Jani
Jyrkänkallio-Mikkola, Jenny
Landeiro, Victor L.
Santos, Edineusa P. [UNESP]
Schneck, Fabiana
Siqueira, Tadeu [UNESP]
Soininen, Janne
Tolonen, Kimmo T.
Melo, Adriano S.
author_role author
author2 Bini, Luis M.
Heino, Jani
Jyrkänkallio-Mikkola, Jenny
Landeiro, Victor L.
Santos, Edineusa P. [UNESP]
Schneck, Fabiana
Siqueira, Tadeu [UNESP]
Soininen, Janne
Tolonen, Kimmo T.
Melo, Adriano S.
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal de Goiás (UFG)
Freshwater Centre
University of Helsinki
Universidade Federal do Mato Grosso
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande
University of Jyväskylä
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Sgarbi, Luciano F.
Bini, Luis M.
Heino, Jani
Jyrkänkallio-Mikkola, Jenny
Landeiro, Victor L.
Santos, Edineusa P. [UNESP]
Schneck, Fabiana
Siqueira, Tadeu [UNESP]
Soininen, Janne
Tolonen, Kimmo T.
Melo, Adriano S.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Biological diversity
Community ecology
Minimal sampling effort
Procrustes
Stream insects
topic Biological diversity
Community ecology
Minimal sampling effort
Procrustes
Stream insects
description Reliable biological assessments are essential to answer ecological and management questions but require well-designed studies and representative sample sizes. However, large sampling effort is rarely possible, because it demands large financial resources and time, restricting the number of sites sampled, the duration of the study and the sampling effort at each site. In this context, we need methods and protocols allowing cost-effective surveys that would, consequently, increase the knowledge about how biodiversity is distributed in space and time. Here, we assessed the minimal sampling effort required to correctly estimate the assemblage structure of stream insects sampled in near-pristine boreal and subtropical regions. We used five methods grouped into two different approaches. The first approach consisted of the removal of individuals 1) randomly or 2) based on a count threshold. The second approach consisted of simplification in terms of 1) sequential removal from rare to common species; 2) sequential removal from common to rare species; and 3) random species removal. The reliability of the methods was assessed using Procrustes analysis, which indicated the correlation between a reduced matrix (after removal of individuals or species) and the complete matrix. In many cases, we found a strong relationship between ordination patterns derived from presence/absence data (the extreme count threshold of a single individual) and those patterns derived from abundance data. Also, major multivariate patterns derived from the complete data matrices were retained even after the random removal of more than half of the individuals. Procrustes correlation was generally high (>0.8), even with the removal of 50% of the species. Removal of common species produced lower correlation than removal of rare species, indicating higher importance of the former to estimate resemblance between assemblages. Thus, we conclude that sampling designs can be optimized by reducing the sampling effort at a site. We recommend that such efforts saved should be redirected to increase the number of sites studied and the duration of the studies, which is essential to encompass larger spatial, temporal and environmental extents, and increase our knowledge of biodiversity.
publishDate 2020
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2020-12-12T01:06:11Z
2020-12-12T01:06:11Z
2020-03-01
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105937
Ecological Indicators, v. 110.
1470-160X
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/198194
10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105937
2-s2.0-85075526049
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105937
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/198194
identifier_str_mv Ecological Indicators, v. 110.
1470-160X
10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105937
2-s2.0-85075526049
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Ecological Indicators
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Scopus
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP
instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron:UNESP
instname_str Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron_str UNESP
institution UNESP
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
collection Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1808129033822535680