schliessen

Filtern

 

Bibliotheken

A Comparative Test of Phylogenetic Diversity Indices

Traditional measures of biodiversity, such as species richness, usually treat species as being equal. As this is obviously not the case, measuring diversity in terms of features accumulated over evolutionary history provides additional value to theoretical and applied ecology. Several phylogenetic d... Full description

Journal Title: Oecologia 2008, Vol.157 (3), p.485-495
Main Author: SCHWEIGER, Oliver
Other Authors: KLOTZ, Stefan , DURKA, Walter , KIIHN, Ingolf
Format: Electronic Article Electronic Article
Language: English
Subjects:
Publisher: Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer
ID: ISSN: 0029-8549
Zum Text:
SendSend as email Add to Book BagAdd to Book Bag
Staff View
recordid: cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69405054
title: A Comparative Test of Phylogenetic Diversity Indices
format: Article
creator:
  • SCHWEIGER, Oliver
  • KLOTZ, Stefan
  • DURKA, Walter
  • KIIHN, Ingolf
subjects:
  • Animal and plant ecology
  • Animal, plant and microbial ecology
  • Biodiversity
  • Biological and medical sciences
  • Biological taxonomies
  • Biomedical and Life Sciences
  • Community Ecology - Methods Paper
  • Community Ecology - Original Paper
  • Computer Simulation
  • Diversity indices
  • Ecology
  • Extinct species
  • Functional diversity
  • Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
  • General aspects
  • Genetic Variation
  • Hydrology/Water Resources
  • Life Sciences
  • Mathematical monotonicity
  • Phylogenetics
  • Phylogeny
  • Plant Sciences
  • Regression Analysis
  • Skewed distribution
  • Species diversity
  • Species extinction
ispartof: Oecologia, 2008, Vol.157 (3), p.485-495
description: Traditional measures of biodiversity, such as species richness, usually treat species as being equal. As this is obviously not the case, measuring diversity in terms of features accumulated over evolutionary history provides additional value to theoretical and applied ecology. Several phylogenetic diversity indices exist, but their behaviour has not yet been tested in a comparative framework. We provide a test of ten commonly used phylogenetic diversity indices based on 40 simulated phylogenies of varying topology. We restrict our analysis to a topological fully resolved tree without information on branch lengths and species lists with presence-absence data. A total of 38,000 artificial communities varying in species richness covering 5-95% of the phylogenies were created by random resampling. The indices were evaluated based on their ability to meet a priori defined requirements. No index meets all requirements, but three indices turned out to be more suitable than others under particular conditions. Average taxonomic distinctness (AvTD) and intensive quadratic entropy (J) are calculated by averaging and are, therefore, unbiased by species richness while reflecting phylogeny per se well. However, averaging leads to the violation of set monotonicity, which requires that species extinction cannot increase the index. Total taxonomic distinctness (TTD) sums up distinctiveness values for particular species across the community. It is therefore strongly linked to species richness and reflects phylogeny per se weakly but satisfies set monotonicity. We suggest that AvTD and J are best applied to studies that compare spatially or temporally rather independent communities that potentially vary strongly in their phylogenetic composition—i.e. where set monotonicity is a more negligible issue, but independence of species richness is desired. In contrast, we suggest that TTD be used in studies that compare rather interdependent communities where changes occur more gradually by species extinction or introduction. Calculating AvTD or TTD, depending on the research question, in addition to species richness is strongly recommended.
language: eng
source:
identifier: ISSN: 0029-8549
fulltext: no_fulltext
issn:
  • 0029-8549
  • 1432-1939
url: Link


@attributes
NO1
SEARCH_ENGINEprimo_central_multiple_fe
SEARCH_ENGINE_TYPEPrimo Central Search Engine
RANK2.5119119
LOCALfalse
PrimoNMBib
record
control
sourceidjstor_proqu
recordidTN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69405054
sourceformatXML
sourcesystemPC
jstor_id40309729
sourcerecordid40309729
originalsourceidFETCH-LOGICAL-1468t-17722800ca6725569a1b878591d7784eb68004ecaa6aeb8219b49e0b971a62500
addsrcrecordideNp9kM1OAjEYRRujEUQfwIVmNrob_Vr6uyT4m5joAtdNpxQsGabYDia8vSVDMHHBqovv3Nubg9AlhjsMIO4TAKWkBJAlBklKcoT6mA5JidVQHaM-AFGlZFT10FlKCwBMMWOnqIcl41wORR_RUTEOy5WJpvU_rpi41BZhVnx8beowd41rvS0e8iUm326K12bqrUvn6GRm6uQudu8AfT49TsYv5dv78-t49FZiymVbYiEIkQDWcEEY48rgSgrJFJ4KIamreD5SZ43hxlWSYFVR5aBSAhtOGMAA3Xa9qxi-13maXvpkXV2bxoV10lxRYMBoBnEH2hhSim6mV9EvTdxoDHqrSneqdFalt6o0yZnrXfm6WrrpX2LnJgM3O8Aka-pZNI31ac8RYEoRyTIn_n1ufZt1hqaNxtcHJ5AumXJpM3dRL8I6NlnpwdBVF1qkNsT9HApDUIIo-AXWVZlD
sourcetypeAggregation Database
isCDItrue
recordtypearticle
pqid69405054
display
typearticle
titleA Comparative Test of Phylogenetic Diversity Indices
creatorSCHWEIGER, Oliver ; KLOTZ, Stefan ; DURKA, Walter ; KIIHN, Ingolf
creatorcontribSCHWEIGER, Oliver ; KLOTZ, Stefan ; DURKA, Walter ; KIIHN, Ingolf
descriptionTraditional measures of biodiversity, such as species richness, usually treat species as being equal. As this is obviously not the case, measuring diversity in terms of features accumulated over evolutionary history provides additional value to theoretical and applied ecology. Several phylogenetic diversity indices exist, but their behaviour has not yet been tested in a comparative framework. We provide a test of ten commonly used phylogenetic diversity indices based on 40 simulated phylogenies of varying topology. We restrict our analysis to a topological fully resolved tree without information on branch lengths and species lists with presence-absence data. A total of 38,000 artificial communities varying in species richness covering 5-95% of the phylogenies were created by random resampling. The indices were evaluated based on their ability to meet a priori defined requirements. No index meets all requirements, but three indices turned out to be more suitable than others under particular conditions. Average taxonomic distinctness (AvTD) and intensive quadratic entropy (J) are calculated by averaging and are, therefore, unbiased by species richness while reflecting phylogeny per se well. However, averaging leads to the violation of set monotonicity, which requires that species extinction cannot increase the index. Total taxonomic distinctness (TTD) sums up distinctiveness values for particular species across the community. It is therefore strongly linked to species richness and reflects phylogeny per se weakly but satisfies set monotonicity. We suggest that AvTD and J are best applied to studies that compare spatially or temporally rather independent communities that potentially vary strongly in their phylogenetic composition—i.e. where set monotonicity is a more negligible issue, but independence of species richness is desired. In contrast, we suggest that TTD be used in studies that compare rather interdependent communities where changes occur more gradually by species extinction or introduction. Calculating AvTD or TTD, depending on the research question, in addition to species richness is strongly recommended.
identifier
0ISSN: 0029-8549
1EISSN: 1432-1939
2DOI: 10.1007/s00442-008-1082-2
3PMID: 18566837
4CODEN: OECOBX
languageeng
publisherBerlin/Heidelberg: Springer
subjectAnimal and plant ecology ; Animal, plant and microbial ecology ; Biodiversity ; Biological and medical sciences ; Biological taxonomies ; Biomedical and Life Sciences ; Community Ecology - Methods Paper ; Community Ecology - Original Paper ; Computer Simulation ; Diversity indices ; Ecology ; Extinct species ; Functional diversity ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; General aspects ; Genetic Variation ; Hydrology/Water Resources ; Life Sciences ; Mathematical monotonicity ; Phylogenetics ; Phylogeny ; Plant Sciences ; Regression Analysis ; Skewed distribution ; Species diversity ; Species extinction
ispartofOecologia, 2008, Vol.157 (3), p.485-495
rights
0Copyright 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heildelberg
1Springer-Verlag 2008
22008 INIST-CNRS
lds50peer_reviewed
citedbyFETCH-LOGICAL-1468t-17722800ca6725569a1b878591d7784eb68004ecaa6aeb8219b49e0b971a62500
citesFETCH-LOGICAL-1468t-17722800ca6725569a1b878591d7784eb68004ecaa6aeb8219b49e0b971a62500
links
openurl$$Topenurl_article
thumbnail$$Usyndetics_thumb_exl
backlink
0$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=20599285$$DView record in Pascal Francis
1$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18566837$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
search
creatorcontrib
0SCHWEIGER, Oliver
1KLOTZ, Stefan
2DURKA, Walter
3KIIHN, Ingolf
title
0A Comparative Test of Phylogenetic Diversity Indices
1Oecologia
addtitle
0Oecologia
1Oecologia
descriptionTraditional measures of biodiversity, such as species richness, usually treat species as being equal. As this is obviously not the case, measuring diversity in terms of features accumulated over evolutionary history provides additional value to theoretical and applied ecology. Several phylogenetic diversity indices exist, but their behaviour has not yet been tested in a comparative framework. We provide a test of ten commonly used phylogenetic diversity indices based on 40 simulated phylogenies of varying topology. We restrict our analysis to a topological fully resolved tree without information on branch lengths and species lists with presence-absence data. A total of 38,000 artificial communities varying in species richness covering 5-95% of the phylogenies were created by random resampling. The indices were evaluated based on their ability to meet a priori defined requirements. No index meets all requirements, but three indices turned out to be more suitable than others under particular conditions. Average taxonomic distinctness (AvTD) and intensive quadratic entropy (J) are calculated by averaging and are, therefore, unbiased by species richness while reflecting phylogeny per se well. However, averaging leads to the violation of set monotonicity, which requires that species extinction cannot increase the index. Total taxonomic distinctness (TTD) sums up distinctiveness values for particular species across the community. It is therefore strongly linked to species richness and reflects phylogeny per se weakly but satisfies set monotonicity. We suggest that AvTD and J are best applied to studies that compare spatially or temporally rather independent communities that potentially vary strongly in their phylogenetic composition—i.e. where set monotonicity is a more negligible issue, but independence of species richness is desired. In contrast, we suggest that TTD be used in studies that compare rather interdependent communities where changes occur more gradually by species extinction or introduction. Calculating AvTD or TTD, depending on the research question, in addition to species richness is strongly recommended.
subject
0Animal and plant ecology
1Animal, plant and microbial ecology
2Biodiversity
3Biological and medical sciences
4Biological taxonomies
5Biomedical and Life Sciences
6Community Ecology - Methods Paper
7Community Ecology - Original Paper
8Computer Simulation
9Diversity indices
10Ecology
11Extinct species
12Functional diversity
13Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
14General aspects
15Genetic Variation
16Hydrology/Water Resources
17Life Sciences
18Mathematical monotonicity
19Phylogenetics
20Phylogeny
21Plant Sciences
22Regression Analysis
23Skewed distribution
24Species diversity
25Species extinction
issn
00029-8549
11432-1939
fulltextfalse
rsrctypearticle
creationdate2008
recordtypearticle
recordideNp9kM1OAjEYRRujEUQfwIVmNrob_Vr6uyT4m5joAtdNpxQsGabYDia8vSVDMHHBqovv3Nubg9AlhjsMIO4TAKWkBJAlBklKcoT6mA5JidVQHaM-AFGlZFT10FlKCwBMMWOnqIcl41wORR_RUTEOy5WJpvU_rpi41BZhVnx8beowd41rvS0e8iUm326K12bqrUvn6GRm6uQudu8AfT49TsYv5dv78-t49FZiymVbYiEIkQDWcEEY48rgSgrJFJ4KIamreD5SZ43hxlWSYFVR5aBSAhtOGMAA3Xa9qxi-13maXvpkXV2bxoV10lxRYMBoBnEH2hhSim6mV9EvTdxoDHqrSneqdFalt6o0yZnrXfm6WrrpX2LnJgM3O8Aka-pZNI31ac8RYEoRyTIn_n1ufZt1hqaNxtcHJ5AumXJpM3dRL8I6NlnpwdBVF1qkNsT9HApDUIIo-AXWVZlD
startdate20080901
enddate20080901
creator
0SCHWEIGER, Oliver
1KLOTZ, Stefan
2DURKA, Walter
3KIIHN, Ingolf
general
0Springer
1Springer-Verlag
scope
0IQODW
1CGR
2CUY
3CVF
4ECM
5EIF
6NPM
7AAYXX
8CITATION
97X8
sort
creationdate20080901
titleA Comparative Test of Phylogenetic Diversity Indices
authorSCHWEIGER, Oliver ; KLOTZ, Stefan ; DURKA, Walter ; KIIHN, Ingolf
facets
frbrtype5
frbrgroupidcdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-1468t-17722800ca6725569a1b878591d7784eb68004ecaa6aeb8219b49e0b971a62500
rsrctypearticles
prefilterarticles
languageeng
creationdate2008
topic
0Animal and plant ecology
1Animal, plant and microbial ecology
2Biodiversity
3Biological and medical sciences
4Biological taxonomies
5Biomedical and Life Sciences
6Community Ecology - Methods Paper
7Community Ecology - Original Paper
8Computer Simulation
9Diversity indices
10Ecology
11Extinct species
12Functional diversity
13Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
14General aspects
15Genetic Variation
16Hydrology/Water Resources
17Life Sciences
18Mathematical monotonicity
19Phylogenetics
20Phylogeny
21Plant Sciences
22Regression Analysis
23Skewed distribution
24Species diversity
25Species extinction
toplevelpeer_reviewed
creatorcontrib
0SCHWEIGER, Oliver
1KLOTZ, Stefan
2DURKA, Walter
3KIIHN, Ingolf
collection
0Pascal-Francis
1Medline
2MEDLINE
3MEDLINE (Ovid)
4MEDLINE
5MEDLINE
6PubMed
7CrossRef
8MEDLINE - Academic
jtitleOecologia
delivery
delcategoryRemote Search Resource
fulltextno_fulltext
addata
au
0SCHWEIGER, Oliver
1KLOTZ, Stefan
2DURKA, Walter
3KIIHN, Ingolf
formatjournal
genrearticle
ristypeJOUR
atitleA Comparative Test of Phylogenetic Diversity Indices
jtitleOecologia
stitleOecologia
addtitleOecologia
date2008-09-01
risdate2008
volume157
issue3
spage485
epage495
pages485-495
issn0029-8549
eissn1432-1939
codenOECOBX
abstractTraditional measures of biodiversity, such as species richness, usually treat species as being equal. As this is obviously not the case, measuring diversity in terms of features accumulated over evolutionary history provides additional value to theoretical and applied ecology. Several phylogenetic diversity indices exist, but their behaviour has not yet been tested in a comparative framework. We provide a test of ten commonly used phylogenetic diversity indices based on 40 simulated phylogenies of varying topology. We restrict our analysis to a topological fully resolved tree without information on branch lengths and species lists with presence-absence data. A total of 38,000 artificial communities varying in species richness covering 5-95% of the phylogenies were created by random resampling. The indices were evaluated based on their ability to meet a priori defined requirements. No index meets all requirements, but three indices turned out to be more suitable than others under particular conditions. Average taxonomic distinctness (AvTD) and intensive quadratic entropy (J) are calculated by averaging and are, therefore, unbiased by species richness while reflecting phylogeny per se well. However, averaging leads to the violation of set monotonicity, which requires that species extinction cannot increase the index. Total taxonomic distinctness (TTD) sums up distinctiveness values for particular species across the community. It is therefore strongly linked to species richness and reflects phylogeny per se weakly but satisfies set monotonicity. We suggest that AvTD and J are best applied to studies that compare spatially or temporally rather independent communities that potentially vary strongly in their phylogenetic composition—i.e. where set monotonicity is a more negligible issue, but independence of species richness is desired. In contrast, we suggest that TTD be used in studies that compare rather interdependent communities where changes occur more gradually by species extinction or introduction. Calculating AvTD or TTD, depending on the research question, in addition to species richness is strongly recommended.
copBerlin/Heidelberg
pubSpringer
pmid18566837
doi10.1007/s00442-008-1082-2