Bias in vegetation databases? A comparison of stratified-random and preferential sampling

Journal of Vegetation Science

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 281-291

  Michalcová, Dana ^a   Lvončík, Samuel ^b   Chytrý, Milan ^a   Hájek, Ondřej ^a  

^a MASARYK UNIVERSITY   (Czech Republic)

^b MENDEL UNIVERSITY IN BRNO   (Czech Republic)

Author keywords

Alpha diversity; Beta diversity; Endangered species; Invasive species; Neophytes; Ordination; Parameter estimation; Relev ; Sample based rarefaction; Species number; Stratification; Subjectivity

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE STUDY; DATA SET; DATABASE; ENDANGERED SPECIES; FOREST COVER; INVASIVE SPECIES; ORDINATION; SAMPLING; SPECIES DIVERSITY; SPECIES RICHNESS;

CZECH REPUBLIC; SILESIA;

EID: 79952161731     PISSN: 11009233     EISSN: 16541103     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1654-1103.2010.01249.x     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Acosta, A., Carranza, M.L. & Izzi, C.F. 2005. Combining land cover mapping of coastal dunes with vegetation analysis. Applied Vegetation Science 8: 133-138.
2. Anderson, M.J., Ellingsen, K.E. & McArdle, B.H. 2006. Multivariate dispersion as a measure of beta diversity. Ecology Letters 9: 683-693.
3. Austin, M.P. & Heyligers, P.C. 1989. Vegetation survey design for conservation: gradsect sampling of forests in North-eastern New South Wales. Biological Conservation 50: 13-32.
4. Bossard, M., Feranec, J. & Otahel, J. 2000. CORINE land cover technical guide - addendum 2000. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, DK.
5. Botta-Dukát, Z., Kovács-Láng, E., Rédei, T., Kertész, M. & Garadnai, J. 2007. Statistical and biological consequences of preferential sampling in phytosociology: theoretical considerations and a case study. Folia Geobotanica 42: 141-152.
6. Bunce, R.G.H., Barr, C.J., Clarke, R.T., Howard, D.C. & Lane, A.M.J. 1996. Land classification for strategic ecological survey. Journal of Environmental Management 47: 37-60.
7. Chiarucci, A. 2007. To sample or not to sample? That is the question ... for the vegetation scientist. Folia Geobotanica 42: 209-216.
8. Chytrý, M. 2001. Phytosociological data give biased estimates of species richness. Journal of Vegetation Science 12: 439-444.
9. Chytrý, M. & Rafajová, M. 2003. Czech National Phytosociological Database: basic statistics of the available vegetation plot-data. Preslia 75: 1-15.
10. Chytrý, M., Pyšek, P., Tichý, L., Knollová, I. & Danihelka, J. 2005. Invasions by alien plants in the Czech Republic: a quantitative assessment across habitats. Preslia 77: 339-354.
11. Chytrý, M., Maskell, L.C., Pino, J., Pyšek, P., Vilà, M., Font, X. & Smart, S.M. 2008. Habitat invasions by alien plants: a quantitative comparison among Mediterranean, subcontinental and oceanic regions of Europe. Journal of Applied Ecology 45: 448-458.
12. Coetzee, J.P., Bredenkamp, G.J. & van Rooyen, N. 1995. Plant communities of the subhumid cool temperate mountain bushveld of the Pretoria-Witbank-Heidelberg area, South Africa. South African Journal of Botany 61: 114-122.
13. Colwell, R.K., Mao, C.X. & Chang, J. 2004. Interpolating, extrapolating, and comparing incidence-based species accumulation curves. Ecology 85: 2717-2727.
14. da Silva, J.A., Salomão, A.N., Gripp, A. & Leite, E.J. 1997. Phytosociological survey in Brazilian forest genetic reserve of Cacador. Plant Ecology 133: 1-11.
15. Dengler, J., Löbel, S. & Dolnik, C. 2009. Species constancy depends on plot size - a problem for vegetation classification and how it can be solved. Journal of Vegetation Science 20: 754-766.
16. Diekmann, M., Kühne, A. & Isermann, M. 2007. Random vs non-random sampling: effects on patterns of species abundance, species richness and vegetation-environment relationships. Folia Geobotanica 42: 179-190.
17. Duckworth, J.C., Bunce, R.G.H. & Malloch, A.J.C. 2000. Vegetation gradients in Atlantic Europe: the use of existing phytosociological data in preliminary investigations on the potential effects of climate change on British vegetation. Global Ecology and Biogeography 9: 187-199.
18. Dupré, C., Stevens, C.J., Ranke, T., Bleeker, A., Peppler-Lisbach, C., Gowing, D.J.G., Dise, N.B., Dorland, E., Bobbink, R. & Diekmann, M. 2010. Changes in species richness and composition in European acidic grasslands over the past 70 years: the contribution of accumulative atmospheric nitrogen deposition. Global Change Biology 16: 344-357.
19. Ewald, J. 2002. A probabilistic approach to estimating species pools from large compositional matrices. Journal of Vegetation Science 13: 191-198.
20. Firbank, L.G., Barr, C.J., Bunce, R.G.H., Furse, M.T., Haines-Young, R., Hornung, M., Howard, D.C., Sheail, J., Sier, A. & Smart, S.M. 2003. Assessing stock and change in land cover and biodiversity in GB: an introduction to countryside survey 2000. Journal of Environmental Management 67: 207-218.
21. Gimaret-Carpentier, C., Pélissier, R., Pascal, J.-P. & Houllier, F. 1998. Sampling strategies for the assessment of tree species diversity. Journal of Vegetation Science 9: 161-172.
22. Goedickemeier, I., Wildi, O. & Kienast, F. 1997. Sampling for vegetation survey: some properties of a GIS-based stratification compared to other statistical sampling methods. Coenoses 12: 43-50.
23. Gotelli, N.J. & Colwell, R.K. 2001. Quantifying biodiversity: procedures and pitfalls in the measurement and comparison of species richness. Ecology Letters 4: 379-391.
24. Grabherr, G., Reiter, K. & Willner, W. 2003. Towards objectivity in vegetation classification: the example of the Austrian forests. Plant Ecology 169: 21-34.
25. Haveman, R. & Janssen, J.A.M. 2008. The analysis of long-term changes in plant communities using large databases: the effect of stratified resampling. Journal of Vegetation Science 19: 355-362.
26. Hédl, R. 2007. Is sampling subjectivity a distorting factor in surveys for vegetation diversity? Folia Geobotanica 42: 191-198.
27. Hennekens, S.M. & Schaminée, J.H.J. 2001. TURBOVEG, a comprehensive database management system for vegetation data. Journal of Vegetation Science 12: 589-591.
28. Holeksa, J. & Woźniak, G. 2005. Biased vegetation patterns and detection of vegetation changes using a phytosociological databases. A case study in the forest of the Babia Góra National Park (the West Carpathians, Poland). Phytocoenologia 35: 1-18.
29. Holt, E.A., McCune, B. & Neitlich, P. 2008. Spatial scale of GIS-derived categorical variables affects their ability to separate sites by community composition. Applied Vegetation Science 11: 421-430.
30. Holub, J. & Procházka, F. 2000. Red list of vascular plants of the Czech Republic - 2000. Preslia 72: 187-230.
31. Illyés, E., Chytrý, M., Botta-Dukát, Z., Jandt, U., Škodová, I., Janišová, M., Willner, W. & Hájek, O. 2007. Semi-dry grasslands along a climatic gradient across Central Europe: vegetation classification with validation. Journal of Vegetation Science 18: 835-846.
32. Kenkel, N.C., Juhász-Nagy, P. & Podani, J. 1989. On sampling procedures in population and community ecology. Vegetatio 83: 195-207.
33. Kershaw, K.A. & Looney, J.H.H. 1985. Quantitative and dynamic plant ecology. Edward Arnold, London, UK.
34. Knollová, I., Chytrý, M., Tichý, L. & Hájek, O. 2005. Stratified resampling of phytosociological databases: some strategies for obtaining more representative data sets for classification studies. Journal of Vegetation Science 16: 479-486.
35. Kodym, O., Patočka, B. & Cihelka, M. 1966. Geologický atlas ČSSR (Geological atlas of Czechoslovakia). Ústřední geologickýústav, Praha, CZ.
36. Lájer, K. 2007. Statistical tests as inappropriate tools for data analysis performed on non-random samples of plant communities. Folia Geobotanica 42: 115-122.
37. Láníková, D. & Lososová, Z. 2009. Rocks and walls: natural versus secondary habitats. Folia Geobotanica 44: 263-280.
38. Lepš, J. & Šmilauer, P. 2007. Subjectively sampled vegetation data: don't throw out the baby with the bath water. Folia Geobotanica 42: 169-178.
39. Lloret, F., Solé, A., Pino, J., Vayreda, J., Font, X. & Terradas, J. 2009. Patterns of species impoverishment in managed forests of Catalonia (NE Spain). Journal of Vegetation Science 20: 675-685.
40. Lososová, Z. & Simonová, D. 2008. Changes during the 20th century in species composition of synanthropic vegetation in Moravia (Czech Republic). Preslia 80: 291-305.
41. Lososová, Z., Chytrý, M., Cimalová, Š., Kropáč, Z., Otýpková, Z., Pyšek, P. & Tichý, L. 2004. Weed vegetation of arable land in Central Europe: gradients of diversity and species composition. Journal of Vegetation Science 15: 415-422.
42. Lvončík, S. 2006. Lesní vegetace Slezské pahorkatiny a Ostravské pánve (Forest vegetation of the Silesian Hills and Ostrava Basin). MSc. thesis, Masaryk University, Brno, CZ.
43. Margules, C.R. & Austin, M.P. 1994. Biological models for monitoring species decline: the construction and use of databases. Philosophical Transactions of The Royal Society, B - Biological Sciences 344: 69-75.
44. Michaelsen, J., Schimel, D.S., Friedl, M.A., Davis, F.W. & Dubayah, R.C. 1994. Regression tree analysis of satellite and terrain data to guide vegetation sampling and surveys. Journal of Vegetation Science 5: 673-686.
45. Michalcová, D. 2009. Diverzita lesní vegetace Moravského krasu a přilehlého území (Diversity of forest vegetation of Moravian Karst and adjacent areas). MSc. thesis, Masaryk University, Brno, CZ.
46. Neldner, V.J., Crossley, D.C. & Cofinas, M. 1995. Using geographic information systems (GIS) to determine the adequacy of sampling in vegetation surveys. Biological Conservation 73: 1-17.
47. Neuhäuslová, Z., Moravec, J., Chytrý, M., Sádlo, J., Rybníček, K., Kolbek, J. & Jirásek, J. 1997. Mapa potenciální přirozené vegetace České republiky 1: 500 000 (Map of potential natural vegetation of the Czech Republic 1: 500 000). Botanickýústav AV ČR, Průhonice, CZ.
48. Økland, R.H. 2007. Wise use of statistical tools in ecological field studies. Folia Geobotanica 42: 123-140.
49. Olsen, A.R., Sedransk, J., Edwards, D., Gotway, C.A., Liggert, W., Rathbun, S., Reckhow, K.H. & Young, L.J. 1999. Statistical issues for monitoring ecological and natural resources in the United States. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 54: 1-45.
50. Ortega, M., Elena-Roselló, R. & García del Barrio, J.M. 2004. Estimation of plant diversity at landscape level: a methodological approach applied to three Spanish rural areas. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 95: 97-116.
51. Palmer, M.W., Earls, P.G., Hoagland, B.W., White, P.S. & Wohlgemuth, T. 2002. Quantitative tools for perfecting species lists. Environmetrics 13: 121-137.
52. Podani, J. 1984. Spatial processes in the analysis of vegetation: theory and review. Acta Botanica Hungarica 30: 75-118.
53. Pyšek, P., Jarošík, V., Kropáč, Z., Chytrý, M., Wild, J. & Tichý, L. 2005. Effects of abiotic factors on species richness and cover in Central European weed communities. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 109: 1-8.
54. Pyšek, P., Sádlo, J. & Mandák, B. 2002. Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic. Preslia 74: 97-186.
55. Roleček, J., Chytrý, M., Hájek, M., Lvončík, S. & Tichý, L. 2007. Sampling design in large-scale vegetation studies: do not sacrifice ecological thinking to statistical purism! Folia Geobotanica 42: 199-208.
56. Šamonil, P., Polesná, K. & Unar, P. 2009. Plant community variability within potential natural vegetation units: a case study from the Bohemian Karst. Journal of Forest Science 55: 485-501.
57. Schaminée, J.H.J., Hennekens, S.M., Chytrý, M. & Rodwell, J.S. 2009. Vegetation-plot data and databases in Europe: an overview. Preslia 81: 173-185.
58. Siebert, S.J., van Wyk, A.E., Bredenkamp, G.J. & du Plessis, F. 2002. The grasslands and wetlands of the Sekhukhuneland centre of plant endemism, South Africa. Bothalia 32: 211-231.
59. Skalický, V. 1988. Regionálně fytogeografickéčlenění (regional phytogeographical division). In: Hejný, S. & Slavík, B. (eds.) Květena České socialistické republiky 1 (Flora of the Czech Socialist Republic 1), pp. 103-121. Academia, Praha, CZ.
60. Stohlgren, T.J., Chong, G.W., Kalkhan, M.A. & Schell, L.D. 1997a. Rapid assessment of plant diversity patterns: a methodology for landscapes. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 48: 25-43.
61. Stohlgren, T.J., Chong, G.W., Kalkhan, M.A. & Schell, L.D. 1997b. Multiscale sampling of plant diversity: effects of minimum mapping unit size. Ecological Applications 7: 1064-1074.
62. Stohlgren, T.J., Coughenour, M.B., Chong, G.W., Binkley, D., Kalkhan, M.A., Schell, L.D., Buckley, D.J. & Berry, J.K. 1997c. Landscape analysis of plant diversity. Landscape Ecology 12: 155-170.
63. ter Braak, C.J.F. & Šmilauer, P. 2002. CANOCO reference manual and CanoDraw for Windows user's guide. Software for Canonical Community Ordination (version 4.5). Biometris, Wageningen NL & České Budějovice, CZ.
64. Tichý, L. 2002. JUICE, software for vegetation classification. Journal of Vegetation Science 13: 451-453.
65. van Kley, J.E. & Schaminée, J.H.J. 2003. Large-scale ordination and gradient analysis of salt-marsh communities in the Netherlands in the light of the Dutch National Vegetation Classification. Phytocoenologia 33: 335-347.
66. Vesecký, A., Petrovič, Š., Briedoň, V. & Karský, V. (eds.) 1958. Atlas podnebíČeskoslovenské republiky (Climate atlas of the Czechoslovak Republic). Ústřední správa geodesie a kartografie, Praha, CZ.
67. Vilà, M., Pino, J., Montero, A. & Font, X. 2010. Are island plant communities more invaded than their mainland counterparts? Journal of Vegetation Science 21: 438-446.
68. Westhoff, V. & van der Maarel, E. 1978. The Braun-Blanquet approach. In: Whittaker, R.H. (ed.) Classification of plant communities, pp. 287-399. W. Junk, The Hague, NL.
69. Wilson, J.B. 2007. Priorities in statistics, the sensitive feet of elephants, and don't transform data. Folia Geobotanica 42: 161-167.