Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Artifacts and Artifictions in Biodiversity Research

  • Published:
Folia Geobotanica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The biodiversity crisis demands that scientists be careful in their application of quantitative methods, because misuse of biodiversity statistics can lead to trivial but real patterns (artifacts) or to false patterns (artifictions). While misuses such as biases in taxonomic ratios, standardization by dividing by area or individuals, and the rarefaction effect have been repeatedly recognized in the literature, they continue to appear regularly in the scientific literature. Here, we illustrate (using data from North American floras and the Tallgrass Prairie Preserve in Oklahoma, USA) examples of how artifacts and artifictions can lead to misinterpretation of biodiversity patterns. We urge biogeographers and ecologists to be vigilant when using biodiversity statistics, to avoid false interpretations.

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

  • Adler PB, Lauenroth WK (2003) The power of time: spatiotemporal scaling of species diversity. Ecol Lett 6:749–756

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arrhenius O (1921) Species and area. J Ecol 9:95s–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown RL, Peet RK (2003) Diversity and invasibility of southern Appalachian plant communities. Ecology 84:32–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caputi L, Andreakis N, Mastrototaro F, Cirino P, Vassillo M, Sordino P (2007) Cryptic speciation in a model invertebrate chordate. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:9364–9369

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chiarucci A, Alongi C, Wilson JB (2004) Competitive exclusion and the No-Interaction model operate simultaneously in microcosm plant communities. J Veg Sci 15:789–796

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke KR, Warwick RM (1999) The taxonomic distinctness measure of biodiversity: weighting of step lengths between hierarchical levels. Mar Ecol-Prog Ser 184:21–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connor EF, McCoy ED (1979) The statistics and biology of the species-area relationship. Amer Naturalist 113:791–833

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elton C (1946) Competition and the structure of ecological communities. J Anim Ecol 15:54–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elton C (1958) The ecology of invasions by animals and plants. Methuen and Company, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Enquist BJ, Haskell JP, Tiffney BH (2002) General patterns of taxonomic and biomass partitioning in extant and fossil plant communities. Nature 419:610–613

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ewald J (2003) The calcareous riddle: why are there so many calciphilous species in the central European flora? Folia Geobot 38:357–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher KM (2006) Rank-free monography: A practical example from the moss clade Leucophanella (Calymperaceae). Syst Bot 31:13–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher RA, Corbet AS, Williams CB (1943) The relationship between the number of species and the number of individuals in a random sample of an animal population. J Anim Ecol 12:42–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flather CH, Stohlgren TJ, Jarnevich C, Barnett D, Kartesz J (2006) Plant species invasions along the latitudinal gradient in the United States: Reply. Ecology 87:3213–3217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fridley JD, Brown RL, Bruno JE (2004) Null models of exotic invasion and scale-dependent patterns of native and exotic species richness. Ecology 85:3215–3222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fridley JD, Peet RK, Wentworth TR, White PS (2005) Connecting fine- and broad-scale species-area relationships of Southeastern US Flora. Ecology 86:1172–1177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fridley JD, Peet RK, van der Maarel E, Willems JH (2006a) Integration of local and regional species-area relationships from space-time species accumulation. Amer Naturalist 168:133–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fridley JD, Qian H, White PS, Palmer MW (2006b) Plant species invasions along the latitudinal gradient in the United States: comment. Ecology 87:3209–3213

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fridley JD, Stachowicz JJ, Naeem S, Sax DF, Seabloom EW, Smith MD, Stohlgren TJ, Tilman D, Von Holle B (2007) The invasion paradox: Reconciling pattern and process in species invasions. Ecology 88:3–17

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gaston KJ, Mound LA (1993) Taxonomy, hypothesis testing and the biodiversity crisis. Proc Roy Soc London, Ser B, Biol Sci 251:139–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillman LN, Wright SD (2006) The influence of productivity on the species richness of plants: a critical assessment. Ecology 87:1234–1243

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gleason HA (1922) On the relation between species and area. Ecology 3:158–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg DE, Estabrook GF (1998) Separating the effects of number of individuals sampled and competition on species diversity: an experimental and analytic approach. J Ecol 86:983–988

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldblatt P, Manning JC (2002) Plant diversity of the Cape Region of South Africa. Proc Roy Soc London, Ser B, Biol Sci 89:281–302

    Google Scholar 

  • Gotelli NJ, Colwell RK (2001) Quantifying biodiversity: procedures and pitfalls in the measurement and comparison of species richness. Ecol Lett 4:379–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grace JB (1999) The factors controlling species density in herbaceous plant communities: an assessment. Perspect Pl Ecol Evol Syst 2:1–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grime JP (1997) The humped-back model: a response to Oksanen. J Ecol 85:97–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herben T, Mandák B, Bímová K, Münzbergová Z (2004) Invasibility and species richness of a community: A neutral model and a survey of published data. Ecology 85:3223–3233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hubbell SP (2001) The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Hubbell SP, Foster RB, O’Brien ST, Harms KE, Condit R, Wechsler B, Wright SJ, Loo de Lao S (1999) Light gap disturbances, recruitment limitation, and tree diversity in a neotropical forest. Science 283:554–557

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Järvinen O (1982) Species-to-genus ratios in biogeography – a historical note. J Biogeogr 9:363–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones MM, Rojas PO, Tuomisto H, Clark DB (2007) Environmental and neighbourhood effects on tree fern distributions in a neotropical lowland rain forest. J Veg Sci 18:13–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee MSY (2003) Species concepts and species reality: salvaging a Linnaean rank. J Evol Biol 16:179–188

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Luo YJ, Qin GL, Du GZ (2006) Importance of assemblage-level thinning: A field experiment in an alpine meadow on the Tibet plateau. J Veg Sci 17:417–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marañón T, García LV (1997) The relationship between diversity and productivity in plant communities: facts and artefacts. J Ecol 85:95–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller J, Franklin J, Aspinall R (2007) Incorporating spatial dependence in predictive vegetation models. Ecol Modelling 202:225–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moerman DE, Estabrook GF (2006) The botanist effect: counties with maximal species richness tend to be home to universities and botanists. J Biogeogr 33:1969–1974

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oksanen J (1996) Is the humped relationship between species richness and biomass an artefact due to plot size? J Ecol 84:293–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer MW (1987) Variability in species richness within Minnesota oldfields: a use of the variance test. Vegetatio 70:61–64

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer MW (1991) Patterns of species richness among North Carolina hardwood forests: tests of two hypotheses. J Veg Sci 2:361–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer MW (1995) How should one count species? Nat Areas J 15:124–135

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer MW (2005) Temporal trends of exotic species richness in North American floras: an overview. EcoScience 12:386–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer MW (2006) Scale dependence of native and alien species richness in North American floras. Preslia 78:427–436

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer MW (2007a) Species-area curves and the geometry of nature. In Storch D, Marquet PA, Brown JH (eds) Scaling biodiversity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 15–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer MW (2007b) The vascular flora of the tallgrass prairie preserve, Osage County, Oklahoma. Castanea 72:235–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer MW, Clark DA, Clark DB (2000) Is the number of tree species in small tropical forest plots nonrandom? Community Ecol 1:95–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer MW, Arévalo JR, Cobo MC, Earls PG (2003) Species richness and soil reaction in a northeastern Oklahoma landscape. Folia Geobot 38:381–389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer MW, van der Maarel E (1995) Variance in species richness, species association, and niche limitation. Oikos 73:203–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer MW, Wade GL, Neal PR (1995) Standards for the writing of floras. BioScience 45:339–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pleijel F (1999) Phylogenetic taxonomy, a farewell to species, and a revision of Heteropodarke (Hesionidae, Polychaeta, Annelida). Syst Biol 48:755–789

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preston FW (1960) Time and space and the variation of species. Ecology 41:611–627

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qian H, Fridley JD, Palmer MW (2007) The latitudinal gradient of species-area relationships of vascular plants of North America. Amer Naturalist 170:690–701

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapson GL, Thompson K, Hodgson JG (1997) The humped relationship between species richness and biomass – testing its sensitivity to sample quadrat size. J Ecol 85:99–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanders HL (1968) Marine benthic diversity: a comparative study. Amer Naturalist 102:243–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stohlgren TJ, Binkley D, Chong GW, Kalkhan MA, Schell LD, Bull KA, Otsuki Y, Newman G, Bashkin M, Son Y (1999) Exotic plant species invade hot spots of native plant diversity. Ecol Monogr 69:25–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Stohlgren TJ, Barnett DT, Kartesz J (2003) The rich get richer: patterns of plant invasions in the United States. Frontiers Ecol Environm 1:11–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strong DR (1980) Null hypotheses in ecology. Synthese 43:271–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tipper JC (1979) Rarefaction and rarefiction – use and abuse of a method in paleoecology. Paleobiol 5:423–434

    Google Scholar 

  • van Vuuren DP, Sala OE, Pereira HM (2006) The future of vascular plant diversity under four global scenarios. Ecol Soc 11:25, available at www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art25/

  • White EP (2004) Two-phase species-time relationships in North American land birds. Ecol Lett 7:329–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams CB (1947) The generic relations of species in small ecological communities. J Anim Ecol 16:11–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams CB (1964) Patterns in the balance of nature. Academic Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Withers M, Palmer MW, Wade GL, White PS, Neal PR (1998) Changing patterns in the number of species in North American floras. In Sisk T (eds) Perspectives on the land-use history of North America: a context for understanding our changing environment. USGS, Biological Resources Division, pp 23–32

  • Yee DA, Juliano SA (2007) Abundance matters: a field experiment testing the more individuals hypothesis for richness-productivity relationships. Oecologia 153:153–162

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zobel K, Liira J (1997) A scale-independent approach to the richness vs. biomass relationship in ground-layer plant communities. Oikos 80:325–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Tomáš Herben and two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments on the manuscript. A full listing of people who helped with the tallgrass prairie data set and the floras project might exceed the length of this note. See Palmer et al. (2003) for the former and Palmer (2006) for the latter. Funding provided by NSF Grant Number EPS-0447262, ENGO-project funded by the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, and an EPA STAR/GRO fellowship awarded to DJM.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Botany, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK, 74078, USA

    Michael W. Palmer & Daniel J. McGlinn

  2. Department of Biology, Syracuse University, 130 College Place Syracuse, Syracuse, NY, 13244, USA

    Jason D. Fridley

Authors
  1. Michael W. Palmer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniel J. McGlinn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jason D. Fridley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael W. Palmer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Palmer, M.W., McGlinn, D.J. & Fridley, J.D. Artifacts and Artifictions in Biodiversity Research. Folia Geobot 43, 245–257 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12224-008-9012-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12224-008-9012-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation