Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The importance of timing and number of surveys in fungal biodiversity research

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Biodiversity and Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Practical conservation of biological diversity is dependent on reliable knowledge about what kind, how much, and where the diversity is. To obtain such knowledge three questions, why, what, and how, must be answered before commencing any biodiversity survey. While the questions why and what are often value decisions and thus determined outside the realm of scientific research, the question about how the surveys are conducted lies in the heart of science. Here, we report an intensive repeated survey of wood-inhabiting fungi with the aim of determining the optimal timing and number of the surveys for reliable estimation of the diversity of this species group. The research focusing on the ecology of wood-inhabiting fungi has been increasing but little is known about the reliability of the methods. The variation in the estimates of diversity among surveys was high and the results varied between studied species groups. The site-scale detectability for species belonging to different groups varied from 10 to 95% depending on the survey month and the species group. We conclude that because detectability of many fungi turned out to be poor even when surveys were conducted at an optimal time, the common practice of using a single fruit body survey to estimate fungal diversity of any given area is not enough. We suggest that multiple surveys at an optimal time should be a norm in fungal diversity studies. Improper methodology results in unreliable outcomes that have potential to hamper our goal of conserving the biological diversity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahti T, Hämet-Ahti L, Jalas J (1968) Vegetation zones and their sections in northwestern Europe. Ann Bot Fenn 5:169–211

    Google Scholar 

  • Allmér J, Vasiliauskas R, Ihrmark K, Stenlid J, Dahlberg A (2006) Wood-inhabiting fungal communities in woody debris of Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.), as reflected by sporocarps, mycelial isolations and T-RFLP identification. FEMS microbiol ecol 55:57–67

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bässler C, Müller J, Dziock F, Brandl R (2010) Effects of resource availability and climate on the diversity of wood-decaying fungi. J Ecol 98:822–832

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berglund H, Edman M, Ericson L (2005) Temporal variation of wood-fungi diversity in boreal old-growth forests: implications for monitoring. Ecol Appl 15:970–982

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boddy L, Jones TH (2008) Interactions between basidiomycota and invertebrates. In: Boddy L, Frankland JC, van West P (eds) Ecology of saprotrophic basidiomycetes. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 155–179

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Boddy L, Frankland JC, Pv West (eds) (2008) Ecology of saprotrophic basidiomycetes. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlberg A, Mueller GM (2011) Applying IUCN red-listing criteria for assessing and reporting on the conservation status of fungal species. Fungal Ecol 4:147–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Boer W, van der Val A (2008) Interactions between saprotrophic basidiomycetes and bacteria. In: Boddy L, Frankland JC, van West P (eds) Ecology of saprotrphic basidiomycetes. Elsevier, Amsterdam, p 143

    Google Scholar 

  • Egli S, Peter M, Buser C, Stahel W, Ayer F (2006) Mushroom picking does not impair future harvests – results of a long-term study in Switzerland. Biol Conserv 129:271–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Field SA, Tyre AJ, Possingham HP (2005) Optimizing allocation of monitoring effort under economic and observational constraints. J Wild Manag 69:473–482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Field SA, O’Connor PJ, Tyre AJ, Possingham HP (2007) Making monitoring meaningful. Austral Ecol 32:485–491

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gange AC, Gange EG, Sparks TH, Boddy L (2007) Rapid and recent changes in fungal fruiting patterns. Science 316:71

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Garrard GE, Bekessy SA, McCarthy MA, Wintle BA (2008) When have we looked hard enough? A novel method for setting minimum survey effort protocols for flora surveys. Austral Ecol 33:986–998

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halme P, Kotiaho JS, Ylisirniö AL, Hottola J, Junninen K, Kouki J, Lindgren M, Mönkkönen M, Penttilä R, Renvall P, Siitonen J, Similä M (2009) Perennial polypores as indicators of annual and red-listed polypores. Ecol Indic 9:256–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen L, Knudsen H (1997) Nordic macromycetes vol 3, heterobasidioid, aphyllophoroid and gastromycetoid basidiomycetes. Nordsvamp, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen L, Knudsen H (2000) Nordic macromycetes vol 1 ascomycetes. Nordsvamp, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Heilmann-Clausen J, Christensen M (2003) Fungal diversity on decaying beech logs – implications for sustainable forestry. Biodivers Conserv 12:953–973

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heilmann-Clausen J, Christensen M (2005) Wood-inhabiting macrofungi in Danish beech-forests–conflicting diversity patterns and their implications in a conservation perspective. Biol Conserv 122:633–642

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jönsson MT, Edman M, Jonsson BG (2008) Colonization and extinction patterns of wood-decaying fungi in a boreal old-growth Picea abies forest. J Ecol 96:1065–1075

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Junninen K, Komonen A (2011) Conservation ecology of boreal polypores: a review. Biol Conserv 144:11–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Juutilainen K, Halme P, Kotiranta H, Mönkkönen M (2011) Size matters in studies of dead wood and wood-inhabiting fungi. Fungal Ecol 4:342–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kauserud H, Stige LC, Vik JO, Okland RH, Høiland K, Stenseth NC (2008) Mushroom fruiting and climate change. PNAS 105:3811–3814

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kauserud H, Heegaard E, Semenov MA, Boddy L, Halvorsen R, Stige LC, Sparks TH, Gange AC, Stenseth NC (2010) Climate change and spring-fruiting fungi. Proc R Soc B 277:1169–1177

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kery M, Spillmann JH, Truong C, Holderegger R (2006) How biased are estimates of extinction probability in revisitation studies? J Ecol 94:980–986

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleijn D, Baquero R, Clough Y, Diaz M, Esteban J, Fernandez F, Gabriel D, Herzog F, Holzschuh A, Jöhl R, Knop E, Kruess A, Marshall EJ, Steffan-Dewenter I, Tscharntke T, Verhulst J, West TM, Yela JL (2006) Mixed biodiversity benefits of agri-environment schemes in five European countries. Ecol Lett 9:243–254

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kotiranta H, Saarenoksa R, Kytövuori I (2009) Aphyllophoroid fungi of Finland. A check-list with ecology, distribution and threat categories. Norrlinia 19:1–223

    Google Scholar 

  • Kull T, Sammul M, Kull K, Lanno K, Tali K, Gruber B, Schmeller D, Henle K (2008) Necessity and reality of monitoring threatened European vascular plants. Biodivers Conserv 17:3383–3402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kytövuori I, Nummela-Salo U, Ohenoja E, Salo P, Vauras J (2005) Helttasienten ja tattien ekologiataulukko. Ecology table of agarics and boletes in Finland. Suomen helttasienten ja tattien ekologia, levinneisyys ja uhanalaisuus (eds P. Salo, T. Niemelä, U. Nummela-Salo & E. Ohenoja), pp 228–426. Edita, Helsinki

  • Legg CJ, Nagy L (2006) Why most conservation monitoring is, but need not be, a waste of time. J Env Manag 78:194–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lengyel S, Kobler A, Kutnar L, Framstad E, Henry P, Babij V, Gruber B, Schmeller D, Henle K (2008) A review and a framework for the integration of biodiversity monitoring at the habitat level. Biodivers Conserv 17:3341–3356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lodge DJ, Ammirati JF, O`Dell TE, Mueller GM (2004) Collecting and describing macrofungi. In: Mueller GM, Bills GF, Foster MS (eds) Biodiversity of fungi. Inventory and monitoring methods. Elsevier, London, pp 128–158

    Google Scholar 

  • Lõhmus A (2009) Factors of species-specific detectability in conservation assessments of poorly studied taxa: the case of polypore fungi. Biol Conserv 142:2792–2796

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie DI, Royle JA (2005) Designing occupancy studies: general advice and allocating survey effort. J Appl Ecol 42:1105–1114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie DI, Nichols JD, Royle JA, Pollock KH, Bailey LL, Hines JE (2006) Occupancy estimation and modeling: inferring patterns and dynamics of species occurrence. Elsevier, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  • Mönkkönen M, Ylisirniö A, Hämäläinen T (2009) Ecological efficiency of voluntary conservation of boreal-forest biodiversity. Conserv Biol 23:339–347

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller GM, Schmit JP (2007) Fungal biodiversity: what do we know? what can we predict? Biodivers Conserv 16:1–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller GM, Bills GF, Foster MS (eds) (2004) Biodiversity of fungi: inventory and monitoring methods. Elsevier, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller GM, Schmit JP, Leacock PR, Buyck B, Cifuentes J, Desjardin DE et al (2007) Global diversity and distribution of macrofungi. Biodivers Conserv 16:37–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller J, Engel H, Blaschke M (2007) Assemblages of wood-inhabiting fungi related to silvicultural management intensity in beech forests in southern Germany. Eur J For Res 126:513–527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norstedt G, Bader P, Ericson L (2001) Polypores as indicators of conservation value in Corsican pine forests. Biol Conserv 99:347–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ovaskainen O, Nokso-Koivisto J, Hottola J, Rajala T, Pennanen T, Ali-Kovero H, Miettinen O, Oinonen P, Auvinen P, Paulin L, Larsson KH, Mäkipää R (2010) Identifying wood-inhabiting fungi with 454 sequencing–what is the probability that BLAST gives the correct species? Fungal Ecol 3:274–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker-Rhodes AF (1955) Statistical aspects of fungus forays. Trans Brit Mycol Soc 38:283–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Possingham HP, Grantham H, Rondinini C (2007) How can you conserve species haven’t been found? J Biogeogr 34:758–759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pouska V, Svoboda M, Lepšová A (2010) The diversity of wood-decaying fungi in relation to changing site conditions in an old-growth mountain spruce forest, central Europe. Eur J For Res 129:219–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes JR, Tyre AJ, Jonzen N, McAlpine CA, Possingham HP (2006) Optimizing presence-absence surveys for detecting population trends. J Wild Manag 70:8–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sastre P, Lobo JM (2009) Taxonomist survey biases and the unveiling of biodiversity patterns. Biol Conserv 142:462–467

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schigel DS, Niemelä T, Kinnunen J (2006) Polypores of western Finnish Lapland and seasonal dynamics of polypore beetles. Karstenia 46:37–64

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmit JP (2005) Species richness of tropical wood-inhabiting macrofungi provides support for species-energy theory. Mycologia 97:751–761

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schmit JP, Murphy JF, Mueller GM (1999) Macrofungal diversity of a temperate oak forest: a test of species richness estimators. Can J Bot 77:1014–1027

    Google Scholar 

  • Straatsma G, Ayer F, Egli S (2001) Species richness, abundance, and phenology of fungal fruit bodies over 21 years in a swiss forest plot. Mycol Res 105:515–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vasiliauskas R, Vasiliauskas A, Stenlid J, Matelis A (2004) Dead trees and protected polypores in unmanaged north-temperate forest stands of Lithuania. For Ecol Manag 193:355–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoccoz NG, Nichols JD, Boulinier T (2001) Monitoring of biological diversity in space and time. Tree 16:446–453

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Panu Kunttu was importantly involved in the planning of this study. We thank Atte Komonen, Asko Lõhmus, Jacob Heilmann-Clausen, Jari Kouki, Claudia Perini, an anonymous reviewer and the “Journal club” members for constructive comments on the manuscript. Especially Noora Vartija but also Sini Eräjää, Katja Juutilainen, Emmi Lehkonen, Anni Markkanen, Anna Mäkelä, Kristiina Nyholm, and Katriina Peltonen assisted in the field work. Heikki Kotiranta, Seppo Huhtinen, Tuomo Niemelä, Lasse Kosonen, Unto Söderholm, Tea von Bonsdorff, Ilkka Kytövuori, Matti Kulju, Anni Markkanen and Katja Juutilainen all identified some difficult samples and were thus of priceless help during the work. This research was funded by Koneen säätiö foundation and the Centre of Excellence in Evolutionary Research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre of Excellence in Evolutionary Research, Department of Biological and Environmental Science, University of Jyväskylä, PO Box 35, 40014, Jyväskylä, Finland

    Panu Halme & Janne S. Kotiaho

  2. Natural History Museum, University of Jyväskylä, P.O. Box 35, 40014, Jyväskylä, Finland

    Janne S. Kotiaho

Authors
  1. Panu Halme
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Janne S. Kotiaho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Panu Halme.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOC 301 kb)

Supplementary material 2 (DOC 36 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Halme, P., Kotiaho, J.S. The importance of timing and number of surveys in fungal biodiversity research. Biodivers Conserv 21, 205–219 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-011-0176-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-011-0176-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation