Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Estimation of river ecosystem biodiversity based on the Chao estimator

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

Abstract

The research was focused on identification of plant diversity assessment approach which would be suitable for flowing waters. Moreover, the study attempted to estimate the extent of the survey (sampling effort) needed for detection of full plant diversity in river ecosystems. The analysed data were collected in a botanical survey carried out on the lowland sandy bottom Wel river, which is a very common river type in Europe. The Chao method of estimation of total species richness of macrophytes and Hill numbers were used to estimate the diversity based on very common plants (inverse Simpson index) as well as frequent species (Shannon index) and also including rare species (species richness). The analysis showed that using standard macrophyte survey approach for rivers, it is relatively easy to record abundant plants, but it is not possible to detect all species, because many aquatic macrophytes occur with low frequency and abundance requiring enormous sampling effort to detect all of them. It exceeds capabilities of most scientific projects. To improve the accuracy of diversity estimation, the rarefaction and extrapolation method was recommended. This method can reduce the bias in diversity estimates based on limited observational data, and thus limit inaccurate conclusions and subsequent wrong decisions in the conservation frameworks related to freshwater protection.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Armitage PD, Szoszkiewicz K, Blackburn JH, Nesbitt I (2003) Ditch communities: a major contributor to floodplain biodiversity. Aquat Conserv 13(2):165–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birk SB, Willby NJ (2010) Towards harmonization of ecological quality classification: establishing common grounds in European macrophyte assessment for rivers. Hydrobiologia 652:149–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Błachuta J, Szoszkiewicz K, Gebler D, Schneider SC (2014) How do environmental parameters relate to macroinvertebrate metrics? Prospects for river water quality assessment. Pol J Ecol 62(1):111–122. doi:10.3161/104.062.0111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brabec K, Szoszkiewicz K (2006) Macrophytes and diatoms: major results and conclusions from the STAR project. Hydrobiologia 566:175–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardinale BJ, Duffy JE, Gonzalez A, Hooper DU, Perrings C, Venail P, Narwani A, Mace GM, Tilman D, Wardle DA, Kinzig AP, Daily GC, Loreau M, Grace JB, Larigauderie A, Srivastava DS, Naeem S (2012) Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. Nature 486(7401):59–67

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chao A, Jost L (2012) Coverage-based rarefaction and extrapolation: standardizing samples by completeness rather than size. Ecology 93:2533–2547

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chao A, Lin CW (2012) Nonparametric lower bounds for species richness and shared species richness under sampling without replacement. Biometrics 68:912–921

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chao A, Colwell RK, Chih-Wei L, Gotelli NJ (2009) Sufficient sampling for asymptotic minimum species richness estimators. Ecology 90(4):1125–1133

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chao A, Chiu C-H, Jost L (2010) Phylogenetic diversity measures based on Hill numbers. Philos Trans R Soc B 365:3599–3609

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chao A, Wang YT, Jost L (2013) Entropy and the species accumulation curve: a novel estimator of entropy via discovery rates of new species. Methods Ecol Evol 4:1091–1110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chao A, Chiu C-H, Jost L (2014a) Unifying species diversity, phylogenetic diversity, functional diversity and related similarity and differentiation measures through Hill numbers. Annu Rev Entomol Evol Syst 45:297–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chao A, Gotelli NG, Hsieh TC, Sander EL, Ma KH, Colwell RK, Ellison AM (2014b) Rarefaction and extrapolation with Hill numbers: a framework for sampling and estimation in species biodiversity studies. Ecol Monogr 84:45–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chesson P (2000) Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 31:343–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colwell RK (2013) Estimates: statistical estimation of species richness and shared species from samples. Version 9. User’s Guide and application published at http://purl.oclc.org/estimates

  • Colwell RK, Coddington JA (1994) Estimating terrestrial biodiversity through extrapolation. Philos Trans R Soc B 345:101–118

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Colwell RK, Mao CX, Chang J (2004) Interpolating, extrapolating, and comparing incidence-based species accumulation curves. Ecology 85:2717–2727

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colwell RK, Chao A, Gotelli NJ, Lin SY, Mao CX, Chazdon RL, Longino JT (2012) Models and estimators linking individual-based and sample-based rarefaction, extrapolation, and comparison of assemblage. J Plant Ecol 5:3–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2000). Establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. Directive 2000/60/EC. Off J Eur Commun L 327/1

  • European Communities (1992) Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. Off J Eur Commun L 206:7–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Freni G, Maglionico M, Mannina G, Viviani G (2008) Comparison between a detailed and a simplified integrated model for the assessment of urban drainage environmental impact on an ephemeral river. Urban Water J 5(2):87–96. doi:10.1080/15730620701736878

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Furse M, Hering D, Moog O, Verdonschot P, Johnson RK, Brabec K, Gritzalis K, Buffagni A, Pinto P, Friberg N, Murray-Bligh J, Kokes J, Alber R, Usseglio-Polatera P, Haase P, Sweeting R, Bis B, Szoszkiewicz K, Soszka H, Springe G, Ferdinand Sporka K, Krno I (2006) The STAR project: context, objectives and approaches. Hydrobiologia 566(1):3–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haury J, Peltre M-C, Tremolieres M, Barbe J, Thiebaut G, Bernez I, Daniel H, Chatenet P, Haan-Archipof G, Muller S, Dutartre A, Laplace-Treyture C, Cazaubon A, Lambert-Servien E (2006) A new method to assess water trophy and organic pollution—the Macrophyte Biological Index for Rivers (IBMR): its application to different types of river and pollution. Hydrobiologia 570:153–158

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hill MO (1973) Diversity and evenness: a unifying notation and its consequences. Ecology 54:427–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes NTH, Newman JR, Chadd S, Rouen KJ, Saint L, Dawson FH (1999) Mean trophic rank. A user’s manual. R&D Technical Report E38, Environment Agency, Bristol

  • Hurlbert SH (1971) The nonconcept of species diversity: a critique and alternative parameters. Ecology 52:577–586

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Huston M (1979) A general hypothesis of species diversity. Am Nat 113:81–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jost L (2006) Entropy and diversity. Oikos 113:363–374  

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jost L (2007) Partitioning diversity into independent alpha and beta components. Ecology 88:2427–2439

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jost L, DeVries P, Walla T, Greeney H, Chao A, Ricotta C (2010) Partitioning diversity for conservation analyses. Divers Distrib 16:65–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jusik S, Szoszkiewicz K, Kupiec JM, Lewin I, Samecka-Cymerman A (2015) Development of comprehensive river typology based on macrophytes in the mountain-lowland gradient of different Central European ecoregions. Hydrobiologia 745:241–262

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lawton JH, Bignell DE, Bolton B et al (1998) Biodiversity inventories, indicator taxa and effects of habitat modification in tropical forest. Nature 391:72–76

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Levine JM (2000) Species diversity and biological invasions: relating local process to community patern. Science 288:852–854

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Loreau M, Naeem S, Inchausti P, Bengtsson J, Grime JP, Hector A et al (2001) Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: current knowledge and future challenges. Science 294:804–808. doi:10.1126/science.1064088

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur RH (1965) Patterns of species diversity. Biol Rev 40:510–533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magurran AE (2004) Measuring biological diversity. Blackwell Science, Malden

    Google Scholar 

  • Magurran AE, McGill B (2011) Biological diversity. Frontiers in measurement and assessment. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Moro MF, Sousa DJL, Matias LQ (2014) Rarefaction, richness estimation and extrapolation methods in the evaluation of unseen plant diversity in aquatic ecosystems. Aquat Bot 117:48–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer MW (1990) The estimation of species richness by extrapolation. Ecology 71:1195–1198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peet RK (1974) The measurement of species diversity. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 5:285–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core Team (2013) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: the R foundation for statistical computing. ISBN: 3-900051-07-0. http://www.R-project.org/

  • Rosenzweig ML (1995) Species diversity in space and time. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider SC, Ławniczak AE, Picinska-Faltynowicz J, Szoszkiewicz K (2012) Do macrophytes, diatoms and non-diatom benthic algae give redundant information? Results from a case study in Poland. Limnologica 42(3):204–211

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider B, Cunha ER, Marchese M, Thomaz SM (2014) Explanatory variables associated with diversity and composition of aquatic macrophytes in a large subtropical river floodplain. Aquat Bot 121:67–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shmida A, Wilson MV (1985) Biological determinants of species diversity. J Biogeogr 12:1–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D (1979) Rarefaction as a distribution-free method of expressing and estimating diversity. In: Grassle JF, Patil GP, Smith WK, Taillie C (eds) Ecological diversity in theory and practice. International co-operative publishing house, Fairland, Maryland, pp 159–176

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson EH (1949) Measurement of diversity. Nature 163:688

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soszka H (ed) (2011) Ecological status assessment of the waters in the Wel river catchment. Guidelines for integrated assessment of ecological status of rivers and lakes to support river basin management plans. Institute of Inland Fisheries, Olsztyn

  • Steffen K, Becker T, Herr W, Leuschner C (2013) Diversity loss in the macrophyte vegetation of northwest German streams and rivers between the 1950s and 2010. Hydrobiologia 713:1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szoszkiewicz K, Ciecierska H, Kolada A, Schneider SC, Szwabinska M, Ruszczynska J (2014) Parameters structuring macrophyte communities in rivers and lakes—results from a case study in North-Central Poland. Knowl Manag Aquat Ecosyst 415:8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szoszkiewicz K, Budka A, Pietruczuk K, Kayzer D, Gebler D (2017) Is the macrophyte diversification along the trophic gradient distinct enough for river monitoring? Environ Monit Assess 189:4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich W, Ollik M (2005) Limits to the estimation of species richness: the use of relative abundance distributions. Divers Distrib 11:265–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whittaker RH (1972) Evolution and measurement of species diversity. Talon 21:213–251

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams VL, Witkowski ETF, Balkwill K (2007) The use of incidence-based species richness estimators, species accumulation curves and similarity measures to appraise ethnobotanical inventories from South Africa. Biodivers Conserv 16(9):2495–2513

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The study was funded by the Polish-Norwegian Research Fund within the project “Development and validation of methods for integrated assessment of ecological status of rivers and lakes to support river basin management plans” (deWELopment; contract PNRF–220–AI–1/07) and supported by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education (Contracts No. NN305 145839).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mathematical and Statistical Methods, Poznan University of Life Sciences, Poznan, Poland

    Anna Budka & Agnieszka Łacka

  2. Department of Ecology and Environment Protection, Poznan University of Life Sciences, Poznan, Poland

    Krzysztof Szoszkiewicz

Authors
  1. Anna Budka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Agnieszka Łacka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Krzysztof Szoszkiewicz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anna Budka.

Additional information

Communicated by Daniel Sanchez Mata.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Budka, A., Łacka, A. & Szoszkiewicz, K. Estimation of river ecosystem biodiversity based on the Chao estimator. Biodivers Conserv 27, 205–216 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-017-1429-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-017-1429-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation