Biodiversity at Species Level

Species Diversity Estimate

• depends on
• prevailing taxonomic views about what constitutes a species
• how species are recognized
• study techniques used in field sampling and data collection
• mathematical methods applied in estimating species diversity
Species richness
​ • refers to the number of species in a given area
Maintaining species richness is one of the many ways to conserve biodiversity
Species Area Curves
- relative bet size of area sampled (=A) and the number of species found (=S)
Lognormal distribution
​ most species in a community are moderately abundant while few are rare
abundant
Species richness is not constant through space. SR (for plants and animals) is
negatively related to:
• latitude
• altitude
positively related to:
• area
• environmental variability
and have a complex relationship with:
• time since disturbance
• nutrients
• predation rate
• productivity
Islands tend to have low SR
INTERMEDIATE DISTURBANCE HYPOTHESIS
​ • High species richness is expected in regions with intermediate levels of
disturbance
REASONS FOR HIGH DIVERSITY AT INTERMEDIATE DISTURBANCE:
​ • More heterogeneity within patch at intermediate disturbance
• On a landscape scale, many kinds of patches at intermediate disturbance,
therefore many species
• Overlap of early successional species and late successional species
• Disturbance prevents competitive exclusion and thus allows high niche
overlap at intermediate disturbance. However, few species can cope with high
disturbance.
Evenness
​ • equitability
• uniformity of abundance in an assemblage of species.
• greatest when species are equally abundant.
Diversity Index
​ some overall measure of diversity. Usually combines aspects of richness and
evenness. The most commonly used index is the Shannon Wiener index (H')
Study species structure in the communities:
Species dominance
Species similarity
Species diversity
Species Structure/Diversity Measurements
– the need to assign importance values
• Plain measurement of total number of species in an area is not a satisfactory
measure for species diversity. Why?
- distribution of individuals among species should be considered:
e.g., Systems A and B - each has 2 species, 100 individuals
Importance values
– number of individuals, biomass, cover, productivity, or other indication of
importance
Measurement of “individuals of a species”
​ • In some instances involving sessile, colonial, or vegetatively growing
organisms (i.e., bryozoans, tunicates, seaweeds, etc.) where it is not possible to
define an individual, quadrats subdivided into smaller grids could be used to
assess abundance using chosen indices for reference (e.g., Brillouins index, Saito &
Atobe, etc.)
Species Dominance and Diversity in Communities:
• In a community as a whole, a relatively small percent are usually abundant
(represented by large numbers of individuals, a large biomass, productivity, or other
indication of “importance”)
- Abundant - these dominant species account for the energy flow
• a large percent are rare (have small “importance” values) ​
- rare - determines species diversity
Concept of Ecological Dominance
​ • Not all organisms in the community are equally important in determining the
nature and function of the whole community
• A relatively few species or species groups generally exert the major
controlling influence by virtue of their numbers, size, production or other activities;
we call these groups:
Ecological dominants – species or species groups that largely control the energy
flow and strongly affect the environment of all other species
Species structure measurement
• Index of dominance – use to measure the degree of dominance
Graph
D- dominant species could be one or several species; this sums up the ‘importance’
of the species or group of species in relation to the community as a whole.
Number of Species (S) and Number of Individuals per Species (N/S)
Relationship:

●​ Most natural communities contain a few dominant species with large numbers
of individuals.
●​ Many other species are represented by only a few individuals (rare species).

Impact of Rigorous Physical Environment, Pollution, or Stress:

●​ These factors tend to flatten the curve, meaning the number of individuals per
species becomes more uniform.
●​ This leads to fewer dominant species and more rare species.
Two components of Species Diversity
​ 1. Species richness or variety component
a. expressed by ratios between the number of species and “importance
values” of individuals
- These indices can be used to compare one community or
group of populations with another, provided it is first determined that
the S is a linear function of the log or square root of N.
b. expressed by a species/area index (number of species per unit area)
- but in making comparisons, make sure that the sample sizes are
comparable
Species Diversity Indices - ratios between the number of species and ”importance
values” of individuals
​ 2) Evenness or equitability component - apportionment of individuals
among species should be considered
​ Example:
Two communities with the same S/N index but with widely different evenness
index
Community A ( S =10, N =100), distributed as follows:
91 – 1 – 1 – 1 – 1 – 1 – 1 – 1 – 1 – 1 = 100
Community B (S =10 species, N = 100), distributed as follows:
30 – 25 – 20 – 15 – 5 – 1 – 1– 1 – 1 – 1 = 100
These species diversity components: richness (variety) and evenness, respond
differently to geographical, developmental, or physical factors.

Analysis of Species Diversity Using Diversity Indices

Indices of Species Structure/Species Diversity in Communities
​ a. Index of dominance (dominance index)
​ ​ ​ Simpson
​ b. Index of similarity (S) between two samples (Similarity index)
​ ​ ​ Sorenson
​ c. Indices of species diversity
i. Three species richness or variety indices (d) (Variety Indices)
​ Margalef
ii. Evenness index (e)
​ Pielou
iii. Shannon index of general diversity (H) (Varierty & evenness
index)
​ Shannon &Weaver
Shannon-Weaver’s diversity index, H’, contains information
on the abundance and species composition of an array of species.
Combines the variety and evenness components as one overall index
of diversity.
- This index is one of the best for making comparisons because
it is reasonably independent of sample size (which means that in
practice fewer samples are required to obtain a reliable index for
purposes of comparison).
- Because of the ease in calculation, it has been a favorite
measure for species diversity
Use of two diversity indices to compare sample size:
​ understand not just how many species there are, but also how they are
distributed.
​ Example:
Shannon Index: This measures both the number of species (richness) and how
evenly the individuals are distributed among those species (evenness). It gives an
overall sense of diversity.
Margalef Index: This focuses mainly on the variety of species (richness) without
considering evenness. It's more about how many different species are present.
Application of 3 Diversity indices:
​ Example:
​ Margalef Index (Variety):

●​ Measures species variety (number of species).

●​ Shows a significant drop in variety immediately after insecticide application.

Pielou Index (Evenness):

●​ Measures how evenly individuals are distributed among species.

●​ Indicates an increase in evenness after the insecticide application.

Shannon Index (Variety & Evenness):

●​ Combines variety and evenness to give an overall sense of diversity.

●​ Shows an intermediate response between Margalef and Pielou indices.

Graphic Analyses of Species Diversity

​ Advantages over diversity indices:
●​ sampling bias is reduced
●​ no specific mathematical relationship is assumed
●​ However, fitting equations to such curves may help to reveal basic
mathematical “laws” governing relationships between “S” and “N”.
Graphic treatment of species diversity using ratification method: plotting the
cumulative number of species against cumulative number of individuals counted
The sequence of decreasing diversity supports theory that habitat stability is a
major factor in regulating species diversity
​ Comparison of diversity of different habitats using species abundance
curves. (Data from infauna - polychaetes, bivalves)
​ Another type of graphic analysis: plotting the number of species against
number of individuals by geometric interval (that is, 1-2, 2-4, 4-8, 8-16 and so on),
a truncated normal curve is obtained. (Compare with concave curve)
Diversity at Different Scales
​ R. H. Whittaker (1972) proposed the following measures of S and species
turn-over:
Sα = Alpha “diversity” – the number of species in a local area (or
habitat); the diversity within a site, or quadrat. a.k.a. local diversity
Sβ = Beta “diversity” – the turn-over rate of species from local area to
local area (e.g., from habitat to habitat); the change in species composition
from site to site. a.k.a. species turnover
Sγ = Gamma “diversity” – the number of species in a region; the
diversity of a landscape, or of all sites combined. a.k.a. regional diversity
Higher diversity means longer food chains and more cases of symbiosis
(mutualism, parasitism, commensalism, etc.) and greater possibilities for feedback
control, which reduces oscillations and hence increases stability in the community.
Factors affecting Diversity
​ 1. Time hypothesis
– communities diversify with time, the older communities are therefore,
more diverse
2. Spatial heterogeneity hypothesis
- the more heterogeneous and complex an environment, the more
diverse the flora and fauna
3. Competition hypothesis
- In benign environments, selection is controlled by biological
interactions rather than by physical variables. Interspecific competition is,
therefore, important; species have evolved narrower niches and, hence, there
is higher diversity because more species can partition the available resources.
4. Environmental Stability hypothesis
- The more stable the environmental variables, i.e., temperature,
salinity, oxygen, etc., the more species are present, since it is less likely that
species will become extinct due to vagaries of environmental variables.
5. Productivity hypothesis
- All other things being equal, the greater the productivity, the greater
the diversity, since more resources allow more species.
6. Predation hypothesis
- Predators crop prey populations and, thus, lower competition that
may lead to exclusion of many species.
Combination of Factors (Sanders 1968)
●​ Time-stability hypothesis
- combination of above factors
- incorporates evolutionary considerations and was based on the
most thorough study of marine benthic organisms available.
- his conclusions: that variable, stressful shallow habitats had lower
diversities than the more constant, benign abyssal environments.
- holds that diversity in communities increases during evolutionary time.
Competitive pressures result in competitive displacements; the
assemblage of species becomes relatively more specialized over time.
- The increase in diversity, however, is restricted by the level of
physiological stress and environmental variability that the assemblage
of species has to endure.
- Problems with Sander’s hypothesis:
- Impractical to follow the diversity of communities over
evolutionary time, making it difficult to test directly whether diversity
does indeed increase over time.
- Specialization is very difficult to define in most situations, since
species may have narrow preferences for one dimension of their
needs, while showing broad tolerances for another.
Factors affecting Diversity on a local scale
​ 1. Deleterious substances or conditions
 – e.g., man-made compounds, i.e., sulfide, ammonium, chlorinated
hydrocarbons, etc. ​
- effects of intense levels of pollution on assemblages of organisms are
clear cut (e.g, oil spill on coral reefs)
2. Abundance or limiting key resources
– a low supply of an essential resource may be insufficient to maintain
many species, and thus diversity may be low.
e.g., lowered diversity of benthic polychaetes and bivalves is related to
reduced oxygen concentrations in upwelling areas off southwest Africa.
e.g., Very low supply of food for benthic invertebrates at depths below
3,000 m may be responsible for the lower diversity at such depths
e.g., Very large amounts of resources may also lower diversity as, for
example, in diatoms and higher plants in experimentally enriched salt
marsh plots. In this case, the presence of excess resources, one
opportunistic species (r or exploitatively selected) proliferates
3. Abundance of Consumers and Disturbances
​ The tide pool results reflect the combined impact of competition and
selective grazing.
In tidepools with few snails, Enteromorpha out competed other algal
species, and diversity is therefore low.
At intermediate densities of snails, the abundance of Enteromorpha
and the few preferred food species is reduced; this prevents competitive
exclusion by Enteromorpha so that many algal species, both ephemeral and
perennial, can coexist.
At high densities of snails all edible algae are consumed, leaving low
diversity stands consisting mainly of Chondrus.
4. Specific features of the local environment
- this has to do much with the physical nature of the habitat or the activities of
the organisms living in it which affect diversity.
Ex. In soft sediments the activity of certain animals can provide
habitats for other organisms.
Feces expelled by sea cucumbers (Molpadia oolitica) living in the mud
of Cape Cod Bay onto the sediment form cone-shaped mounds. These
mounds are colonized by tube-dwelling polychaetes (Euchone incolor, Ninoe
nigripes, and Spio limicola). Also, the amphipod, Aeginina, and the bivalve,
Thysara gouldi, inhabit these mounds.
Ex. Other features of the habitat may attract other species, thus,
affecting diversity
- Particular geometry of coral heads may attract differing groups of
species.
- Even more exotic mechanisms may be important, such as the
increased diversity of coral reef fish associated with the vicinity of territories of
the cleaner wrasse. The wrasse removes parasites off other fish, and this is
apparently an important enough service to attract many individuals of many
other fish species. In fact, where cleaner wrasses were absent, 26 of the 49
fish species found in the reef were not found and an additional 12 species
were less abundant.