The partitioning of diversity: showing Theseus a way out of the labyrinth

A methodology for partitioning of biodiversity into a, b and g components has long been debated, resulting in different mathematical frameworks. Recently, use of the Rao quadratic entropy index has been advocated since it allows comparison of various facets of diversity (e.g. taxonomic, phylogenetic and functional) within the same mathematical framework. However, if not well implemented, the Rao index can easily yield biologically meaningless results and lead into a mathematical labyrinth. As a practical guideline for ecologists, we present a critical synthesis of diverging implementations of the index in the recent literature and a new extension of the index for measuring b-diversity. First, we detail correct computation of the index that needs to be applied in order not to obtain negative b-diversity values, which are ecologically unacceptable, and elucidate the main approaches to calculate the Rao quadratic entropy at different spatial scales. Then, we emphasize that, similar to other entropy measures, the Rao index often produces lower-than-expected b-diversity values. To solve this, we extend a correction based on equivalent numbers, as proposed by Jost (2007), to the Rao index. We further show that this correction can be applied to additive partitioning of diversity and not only its multiplicative form. These developments around the Rao index open up an exciting avenue to develop an estimator of turnover diversity across different environmental and temporal scales, allowing meaningful comparisons of partitioning across species, phylogenetic and functional diversities within the same mathematical framework. We also propose a set of R functions, based on existing developments, which perform different key computations to apply this framework in biodiversity science.

[1]  Carlo Ricotta,et al.  Additive partitioning of Rao's quadratic diversity: a hierarchical approach , 2005 .

[2]  Calyampudi R. Rao.  Diversity and dissimilarity coefficients: A unified approach☆ , 1982 .

[3]  L. Jost.  GST and its relatives do not measure differentiation , 2008, Molecular ecology.

[4]  K. Shimatani,et al.  On the measurement of species diversity incorporating species differences , 2001 .

[5]  Kevin J. Gaston,et al.  Measuring beta diversity for presence–absence data , 2003 .

[6]  L. Jost.  Entropy and diversity , 2006 .

[7]  Campbell O. Webb,et al.  Phylomatic: tree assembly for applied phylogenetics , 2005 .

[8]  L. Jost,et al.  Interpreting and estimating measures of community phylogenetic structuring , 2008 .

[9]  J. Schaminée,et al.  Less lineages - more trait variation: phylogenetically clustered plant communities are functionally more diverse. , 2008, Ecology letters.

[10]  T. O. Crist,et al.  The additive partitioning of species diversity: recent revival of an old idea , 2002 .

[11]  S. Pavoine,et al.  Measuring diversity from dissimilarities with Rao's quadratic entropy: are any dissimilarities suitable? , 2005, Theoretical population biology.

[12]  S. Lavorel,et al.  Importance of species abundance for assessment of trait composition: an example based on pollinator communities , 2007 .

[13]  D. Chessel,et al.  From dissimilarities among species to dissimilarities among communities: a double principal coordinate analysis. , 2004, Journal of theoretical biology.

[14]  A. Magurran,et al.  Measuring Biological Diversity , 2004 .

[15]  S. Lavorel,et al.  Partitioning of functional diversity reveals the scale and extent of trait convergence and divergence , 2009 .

[16]  D. Ackerly,et al.  A trait-based approach to community assembly: partitioning of species trait values into within- and among-community components. , 2007, Ecology letters.

[17]  L. Jost.  Partitioning diversity into independent alpha and beta components. , 2007, Ecology.

[18]  D. Mouillot,et al.  Additive partitioning of diversity including species differences: a comment on Hardy & Senterre (2007) , 2008 .

[19]  T. O. Crist,et al.  Additive partitioning of rarefaction curves and species-area relationships: unifying alpha-, beta- and gamma-diversity with sample size and habitat area. , 2006, Ecology letters.

[20]  P. Legendre,et al.  ANALYZING BETA DIVERSITY: PARTITIONING THE SPATIAL VARIATION OF COMMUNITY COMPOSITION DATA , 2005 .

[21]  C. Ricotta.  A note on functional diversity measures , 2005 .

[22]  T. O. Crist,et al.  Additive partitioning of rarefaction curves and species–area relationships: unifying α‐, β‐ and γ‐diversity with sample size and habitat area , 2006 .

[23]  Jan Lepš,et al.  Quantifying and interpreting functional diversity of natural communities: practical considerations matter , 2006 .

[24]  C. Ricotta,et al.  Diversity partitioning of Rao's quadratic entropy. , 2009, Theoretical population biology.

[25]  O. Hardy,et al.  Characterizing the phylogenetic structure of communities by an additive partitioning of phylogenetic diversity , 2007 .

[26]  Mark Vellend,et al.  Do commonly used indices of β‐diversity measure species turnover? , 2001 .

[27]  R. Whittaker.  Communities and Ecosystems , 1975 .

[28]  Zoltán Botta-Dukát,et al.  Rao's quadratic entropy as a measure of functional diversity based on multiple traits , 2005 .

[29]  R. Lande.  Statistics and partitioning of species diversity, and similarity among multiple communities , 1996 .

[30]  A. Chao,et al.  Partitioning diversity for conservation analyses , 2010 .

[31]  M. Hill.  Diversity and Evenness: A Unifying Notation and Its Consequences , 1973 .