Abstract
Ideally, the estimates of biological diversity of a community of species in a habitat should refer to the biological variation among the species and not merely to their numbers and frequencies. However, the current estimates of biodiversity incorporate only the latter two components but not the biological differences among the species. Ganeshaiah et al. [(1997) Current Science 73: 128–133] have proposed an estimate called the Avalanche Index (AI) that can incorporate the biological heterogeneity among the species in a habitat. This estimate, besides being methodologically simple, can incorporate any quantifiable differences among the species, information on species richness and their frequencies in the habitat. In this paper we have estimated AI for tree vegetation in 14 forest types across different ecosystems of the world and have compared these estimates with other indices being currently used. Through this we have attempted to analyse the relative utility of AI in discriminating the habitats based on their biological heterogeneity by capturing their intra-community biological variation. We discuss the merits and demerits of the AI as a comprehensive estimate of biological diversity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Donoghue MJ (1999) Phylogenies and plant evolution. Paper presented in the XVI International Botonical Congress, held at St Louis, Missouri, August 1999
Ganesh T, Ganesan R, Soubadra Devy M, Davidar P and Bawa KS (1996) Assessment of plant biodiversity at a mid-elevation evergreen forest of Kalakad Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve, Western Ghats, India, Current Science, 71: 379–391
Ganeshaiah KN (1998) Haldane's God and the honoured beetles: the cost of a quip. Current Science 74: 656–660
Ganeshaiah KN, Chandrashekara K and Kumar ARV (1997) Avalanche index: a new measure of biodiversity based on biological heterogeneity of the communities. Current Science 73: 128–133
Gaston KJ (1996) What is biodiversity? In: Gaston KJ (ed) Biodiversity: A Biology of Numbers and Differences. Blackwell Science, London
Gentry AH (1982) Pattern of neo-tropical plant species diversity. Evolutionary Biology 15: 1–84
Harper JL and Hawksworth DL (1994) Biodiversity: measurement and estimation. Preface. Phil. Trans. R Soc. London B. 345: 5–12
Hutchinson J (1973) The Families of Flowering Plants. Oxford University Press, London
Johnsingh AJT, Martin MH, Balsingh J and Chelludurai V (1987) Vegetation and avifauna in a thorny scrub habitat in south India. Trop. Ecol. 28: 22–34
Magurran AE (1983) Ecological Diversity and Its Measurement. Croom Helm, London
May RM (1990) Taxonomy as destiny. Nature, London 347: 129–130
Murali KS, Uma Shankar, Uma Shaanker R, Ganeshaiah KN and Bawa KS (1996) Extraction of non-timber forest products in the forests of Biligiri Rangan Hills, India. 2. Population structure, and species composition. Eco. Bot. 50(2): 252–269
Murali KS, Siddappa Setty R, Ganeshaiah KN and Uma Shaanker R (1998) Does forest classification reflect spatial dynamics of vegetation? An analysis using GIS techniques. Current Science 75: 220–227
Norse EA, Rosenbaum KL, Wilcove DS, Wilcox BA, Romme WH, Jhonston DW and Stout ML (1986) Conserving Biological Diversity in Our National Forests. The Wilderness Society, Washington, DC
Pramod P, Joshi NV, Utkarsh Ghate and Madhav Gadgil (1997) On the hospitality of western ghats habitats for bird communities. Current Science 73: 122–127
Prance GT (1994) A comparison of the efficacy of higher taxa and species numbers in the assessment of biodiversity in the neotropics. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. London B 345: 89–99
Sukumar R, Dattaraja HS, Suresh HS, Radhakrishnan J, Vasudeva R, Nirmala S and Joshi NV (1992) Long term monitoring of vegetation in a tropical deciduous forest in Mudumalai, southern India. Current Science 62: 608–616
Uma Shankar, Murali KS, Uma Shaanker R, Ganeshaiah KN and Bawa KS (1998) Extraction of non-timber forest products in the forests of Biligiri Rangan Hills, India. 4. Floristic diversity and population structure in a thorn scrub forest. Econ. Bot. 52(3): 302–315
Vane-Wright RI, Humphries CJ and Williams PH (1991) What to protect? Systematics and the agony of choice. Biological Conservation 55: 233–254
Vane-Wright RI, Smith CR and Kitching IJ (1994) Systematic assessment of taxic diversity by summation. Systematics and Conservation Evaluation 50: 309–326
Williams PH and Gaston KJ (1994) Measuring more of biodiversity: can higher taxon richness predict wholesale species richness? Biological Conservation 67: 211–217
Williams PH, Humphries CJ and Vane-Wright RI (1991) Measuring biodiversity: taxonomic relatedness for conservation priorities. Aust. Syst. Bot 4: 665–679
Williams PH and Humphries CJ (1994) Biodiversity, taxonomic relatedness, and endemism in conservation. Systematics and Conservation Evaluation 50: 269–287
Williams PH, Vane-Wright RI and Humphries CJ (1993) Measuring biodiversity for choosing conservation areas. In: Lasalle J and Gauld ID (eds) Hymenoptera and Biodiversity, pp 309–328. CAB International, Wallingford, UK
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ganeshaiah, K., Shaanker, R.U. Measuring biological heterogeneity of forest vegetation types: avalanche index as an estimate of biological diversity. Biodiversity and Conservation 9, 953–963 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008910918751
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008910918751