Environmental and Ecological Statistics

, Volume 21, Issue 4, pp 611–625 | Cite as

Partitioning of \(\alpha \) and \(\beta \) diversity using hierarchical Bayesian modeling of species distribution and abundance

Article

Abstract

Diversity partitioning is becoming widely used to decompose the total number of species recorded in an area or region \((\gamma )\) into the average number of species within samples \((\alpha )\) and the average difference in species composition \((\beta )\) among samples. Single-value metrics of \(\alpha \) and \(\beta \) diversity are popular because they may be applied at multiple scales and because of their ease in computation and interpretation. Studies thus far, however, have emphasized observed diversity components or comparisons to randomized, null distributions. In addition, prediction of \(\alpha \) and \(\beta \) components using environmental or spatial variables has been limited to more extensive data sets because multiple samples are required to estimate single \(\alpha \) and \(\beta \) components. Lastly, observed diversity components do not incorporate variation in detection probabilities among species or samples. In this study, we used hierarchical Bayesian models of species abundances to provide predictions of \(\alpha \) and \(\beta \) components in species richness and composition using environmental and spatial variables. We illustrate our approach using butterfly data collected from 26 grassland remnants to predict spatially nested patterns of \(\alpha \) and \(\beta \) based on the predicted counts of butterflies. Diversity partitioning using a Bayesian hierarchical model incorporated variation in detection probabilities by butterfly species and habitat patches, and provided prediction intervals for \(\alpha \) and \(\beta \) components using environmental and spatial variables.

Keywords

Bayesian hierarchical modeling Butterflies Diversity partitioning Multiple scales Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) Zero-inflated Poisson distribution 

Supplementary material

10651_2013_271_MOESM1_ESM.docx (26 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (docx 25 KB)

References

  1. Anderson MJ, Crist TO, Chase JM, Vellend M, Inouye BD, Freestone AL, Sanders NJ, Cornell HV, Comita LS, Davies KF, Harrison SP, Kraft NJB, Stegen JC, Swenson NG (2011) Navigating the multiple meaning of beta diversity: a roadmap for the practicing ecologist. Ecol Lett 14:19–28Google Scholar
  2. Bliss CI, Fisher RA (1953) Fitting the negative binomial distribution to biological data. Biometrics 9:176–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brooks SP, Gelman A (1998) General methods for monitoring convergence of iterative simulations. J Comput Graph Stat 7:434–455Google Scholar
  4. Caughley G, Grice D (1982) A correction factor for counting emus from the air, and its application to counts in western australia. Aust Wildl Res 9:253–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Celeux G, Forbes F, Robert C, Titterington D (2006) Deviance information criteria for missing data models. Bayesian Anal 1:651–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Clark JS (2007) Models for ecological data. Princeton University Press, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  7. Cressie NAC (1993) Statistics for spatial data (revised edition). Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Crist TO, Veech JA (2006) Additive partitioning of rarefaction curves and species-area relationships: unifying \(\alpha \)-, \(\beta \)- and \(\gamma \)-diversity with sample size and habitat area. Ecol Lett 9:923–932PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Crist TO, Veech JA, Gering JC, Summerville KS (2003) Partitioning species diversity across landscapes and regions: a hierarchical analysis of \(\alpha,\,\beta \), and \(\gamma \)-diversity. Am Nat 162:734–743PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dorazio RM, Royle JA, Soderstrom B, Glimskar A (2006) Estimating species richness and accumulation by modeling species occurrence and detectability. Ecology 87:842–854PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Famoye F (1993) Restricted generalized poisson regression model. Commun Stat Theory Methods 22:1335–1354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Felix F, Singh KP (2006) Zero-inflated generalized poisson regression model with an application to domestic violence data. J Data Sci 4:117–130Google Scholar
  13. Gelfand AE, Silander JA, Wu S, Latimer A, Lewis P, Rebelo AG, Holder M (2006) Explaining species distribution patterns through hierarchical modeling. Bayesian Anal 1:41–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gelman A (2006) Prior distributions for variance parameters in hierarchical models (comment on article by Browne and Draper). Bayesian Anal 1:515–534Google Scholar
  15. Gelman A, Rubin DB (1992) Inference from iterative simulation using multiple sequences. Stat Sci 7:457–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hall DB, Zhang Z (2004) Marginal models for zero inflated clustered data. Stat Model 4:161–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hofer G, Wagner HH, Herzog F, Edwards PJ (2008) Effects of topographic variability on the scaling of plant species richness in gradient dominated landscapes. Ecography 31:131–139Google Scholar
  18. Jost L (2007) Partitioning diversity into independent alpha and beta components. Ecology 88:2427–2439PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kraft NJB, Comita LS, Chase JM, Sanders NJ, Swenson NG, Crist TO, Stegen JC, Vellend M, Boyle B, Anderson MJ, Cornell HV, Davies KF, Freestone AL, Inouye BD, Harrison SP, Myers JA (2011) Disentangling the drivers of beta-diversity along latitudinal and elevational gradients. Science 333:1755–1758PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lambert D (1992) Zero-inflated poisson regression, with an application to defects in manufacturing. Technometrics 34:1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lande R (1996) Statistics and partitioning of species diversity, and similarity among multiple communities. Oikos 76:5–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lee AH, Wang K, Yau KKW (2001) Analysis of zero-inflated poisson data incorporating extent of exposure. Biometrical J 43:963–975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Peres-Neto PR, Legendre P, Dary S, Borcard D (2006) Variation partitioning of species data matrices: estimation and comparison of fractions. Ecology 87:2614–2625Google Scholar
  24. Potts JM, Elith J (2006) Comparing species abundance models. Ecol Model 199:153–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ridout MDCGB, Hinde J (1998) Models for count data with many zeros. In: Invited paper presented at the nineteenth international biometric conference, Cape Town, South Africa, pp 179–190Google Scholar
  26. Ridout M, Hinde J, Demétrio CGB (2001) A score test for testing a zero-inflated poisson regression model against zero-inflated negative binomial alternatives. Biometrics 57:219–223PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Roschewitz I, Gabriel D, Tscharntke T, Thies C (2005) The effects of landscape complexity on arable weed species in organic and conventional farming. J Appl Ecol 42:873–882CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sandland RL, Cormack RM (1984) Statistical inference for poisson and multinomial models for capture–recapture experiments. Biometrika 71:27–33Google Scholar
  29. Sturtz S, Ligges U, Gelman A (2005) R2winbugs: a package for running winbugs from R. J Stat Softw 12:1–16Google Scholar
  30. Stegen JC, Freestone AL, Crist TO, Anderson MJ, Chase JM, Comita LS, Cornell HV, Davies KF, Harrison SP, Hurlbert AH, Inouye BD, Kraft NJB, Myers JA, Sanders NJ, Swenson NG, Vellend M (2013) Stochastic and deterministic drivers of spatial and temporal turnover in breeding bird communities. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 22:202–212Google Scholar
  31. Tuomisto H (2010) A diversity of beta diversities: straightening up a concept gone awry. part 1. Defining beta diversity as a function of alpha and gamma diversity. Ecography 33:2–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. van der Linde A (2005) Dic in variable selection. Statistica Neerlandica 59:45–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Veech JA, Crist TO (2007) Habitat and climate heterogeneity maintain beta-diversity of birds among landscapes within ecoregions. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 16:650–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Veech JA, Summerville KS, Crist TO, Gering JC (2002) The additive partitioning of diversity: recent revival of an old idea. Oikos 99:3–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wagner HH (2004) Direct multi-scale ordination with canonical correspondence analysis. Ecology 85:342–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wagner HH, Wildi O, Ewald KC (2000) Additive partitioning of plant species diversity in an agricultural mosaic landscape. Landsc Ecol 15:219–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wang L (2010) Irtzip modeling for multivariate zero-inflated count data. J Educ Behav Stat 35:671–692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wang W, Famoye F (1997) Modeling household fertility decisions with generalized poisson regression. J Popul Econ 10:273–283PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wang W, Gelman A (2013) A problem with the use of cross-validation for selecting among multilevel models. http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research/unpublished/xval.pdf. Accessed 24 Dec 2013
  40. Wulu JT, Singh KP, Famoye F, McGwin G (2002) Regression analysis of count data. J Indian Soc Agric Stat 55:220–231Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of StatisticsMiami UniversityOxfordUSA
  2. 2.Department of Biology, Institute for the Environment and SustainabilityMiami UniversityOxfordUSA
  3. 3.Department of StatisticsUniversity of South CarolinaColumbiaUSA

Personalised recommendations