A method to incorporate the effect of taxonomic uncertainty on multivariate analyses of ecological data

Ecography

Volumn 34, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 94-102

  Cayuela, Luis ^a   De la Cruz, Marcelino ^b   Ruokolainen, Kalle ^c  

^a JUNTA DE ANDALUCÍA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSIDAD POLITÉCNICA DE MADRID   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TURKU   (Finland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANONICAL ANALYSIS; CORRESPONDENCE ANALYSIS; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL APPLICATION; TAXONOMY;

AMAZONIA; MEXICO [MEXICO (NTN)]; MEXICO [NORTH AMERICA];

EID: 79952426995     PISSN: 09067590     EISSN: 16000587     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0587.2009.05899.x     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Anderson, M. J. 2001. A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Austral Ecol. 26: 32-46.
2. Brown, J. H. and Lomolino, M. V. 1998. Biogeography, 2nd ed. Sinauer.
3. Cayuela, L. et al. 2006. Fragmentation, disturbance and tree diversity conservation in tropical montane forests. J. Appl. Ecol. 43: 1172-1181.
4. Chessman, B. et al. 1999. Predicting diatom communities at the genus level for the rapid biological assessment of rivers. Freshwater Biol. 41: 317-331.
5. Clarke, K. R. 1993. Non-parametric multivariate analysis of changes in community structure. Aust. J. Ecol. 18: 117-143.
6. Condit, R. et al. 2002. Beta-diversity in tropical forest trees. Science 295: 666-669.
7. Davidar, P. et al. 2007. The effect of climatic gradients, topographic variation and species traits on the beta diversity of rain forest trees. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 16: 510-518.
8. Ferrier, S. et al. 2007. Using generalized dissimilarity modelling to analyse and predict patterns of beta diversity in regional biodiversity assessment. Divers. Distrib. 13: 252-264.
9. Fraser, C. et al. 2009. The bacterial species challenge: making sense of genetic and ecological diversity. Science 323: 741-746.
10. Graham, C. H. et al. 2006. Habitat history improves prediction of biodiversity in rainforest fauna. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103: 632-636.
11. Heger, T. J. et al. 2009. The curse of taxonomic uncertainty in biogeographical studies of free-living terrestrial protists: a case study of testate amoebae from Amsterdam Island. J. Biogeogr. 36: 1551-1560.
12. Heino, J. and Soininen, J. 2007. Are higher taxa adequate surrogates for species-level assemblage patterns and species richness in stream organisms?. Biol. Conserv. 137: 78-89.
13. Higgins, M. A. and Ruokolainen, K. 2004. Rapid tropical forest inventory: a comparison of techniques based on inventory data from western Amazonia. Conserv. Biol. 18: 799-811.
14. Isaac, N. J. B. et al. 2004. Taxonomic inflation: its influence on macroecology and conservation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19: 464-469.
15. Kessler, M. and Bach, K. 1999. Using indicator families for vegetation classification in species-rich Neotropical forest. Phytocoenologia 29: 485-502.
16. Legendre, P. and Legendre, L. 1998. Numerical ecology. Elsevier.
17. Legendre, P. et al. 1994. Modeling brain evolution from behavior: a permutational regression approach. Evolution 48: 1487-1499.
18. Linares-Palomino, R. et al. 2003. The phytogeography of the seasonally dry tropical forests in Equatorial Pacific South America. Candollea 58: 473-499.
19. Losos, J. B. 2008. Rejoinder to Wiens (2008): phylogenetic niche conservatism, its occurrence and importance. Ecol. Lett. 11: 1005-1007.
20. Magurran, A. E. 1988. Ecological diversity and its measurement. Princeton Univ. Press.
21. Mantel, N. 1967. The detection of disease clustering and a generalized regression approach. Cancer Res. 27: 209-220.
22. McKnight, M. W. et al. 2007. Putting beta-diversity on the map: broad scale congruence and coincidence in the extremes. PLoS Biol 5: e272 doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0050272.
23. Mitchell, E. A. D. and Meisterfeld, R. 2005. Taxonomic confusion blurs the debate on cosmopolitanism versus local endemism of free-living protists. Protist 156: 263-267.
24. Moritz, C. et al. 2001. Biogeographical concordance and efficiency of taxon indicators for establishing conservation priority in a tropical rainforest biota. Proc. R. Soc. Lond B 268: 1875-1881.
25. Murphy, J. F. and Davy-Bowker, J. 2005. Spatial structure in lotic macroinvertebrate communities in England and Wales: relationships with physicochemical and anthropogenic stress variables. Hydrobiologia 534: 151-164.
26. Negi, H. R. and Gadgil, M. 2002. Cross-taxon surrogacy of biodiversity in the Indian Grahwal Himalaya. Biol. Conserv. 105: 143-155.
27. Nekola, J. C. and White, P. S. 1999. The distance decay of similarity in biogeography and ecology. J. Biogeogr. 26: 867-878.
28. Oksanen, J. et al. 2008. vegan: community ecology package. R Package ver. 1.15-1, .
29. Oliveira-Filho, A. T. and Ratter, J. A. 1995. A study of the origin of central Brazilian forests by the analysis of plant species distribution patterns. Edinb. J. Bot. 52: 141-194.
30. Pitman, N. et al. 2001. Dominance and distribution of tree species in upper Amazonian terra firm forests. Ecology 82: 2101-2117.
31. Pitman, N. C. A. et al. 2008. Tree community change across 700km of lowland Amazonian Forest from the Andean foothills to Brazil. Biotropica 40: 525-535.
32. Prance, G. T. 1994. A comparison of the efficacy of higher taxa and species numbers in the assessment of biodiversity in the Neotropics. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 345: 89-99.
33. Pyke, C. R. et al. 2001. Floristic composition across a climatic gradient in a Neotropical lowland forest. J. Veg. Sci. 12: 553-566.
34. Qian, H. et al. 2005. Beta diversity of angiosperms in temperate floras of eastern Asia and eastern North America. Ecol. Lett. 8: 15-22.
35. R Development Core Team. 2009. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria .
36. Regan, H. M. et al. 2002. A taxonomy and treatment of uncertainty for ecology and conservation biology. Ecol. Appl. 12: 618-628.
37. Ruokolainen, K. et al. 2002. Two biases in estimating range sizes of Amazonian plant species. J. Trop. Ecol. 18: 935-942.
38. Ruokolainen, K. et al. 2007. Are floristic and edaphic patterns in Amazonian rain forests congruent for trees, pteridophytes and Melastomataceae?. J. Trop. Ecol. 23: 13-25.
39. Slik, J. W. F. et al. 2003. A floristic analysis of the lowland dipterocarp forests of Borneo. J. Biogeogr. 30: 1517-1531.
40. Ter Braak, C. J. F. 1986. Canonical correspondence analysis: a new eigenvector technique for multivariate direct gradient analysis. Ecology 67: 1167-1179.
41. Ter Steege, H. et al. 2003. A spatial model of tree alpha-diversity and density for the Amazon region. Biodivers. Conserv. 12: 2255-2276.
42. Terborgh, J. and Andresen, E. 1998. The composition of Amazonian forests: patterns at local and regional scales. J. Trop. Ecol. 14: 645-664.
43. Tuomisto, H. and Ruokolainen, K. 2006. Analyzing or explaining beta diversity? Understanding the targets of different methods of analysis. Ecology 87: 2697-2708.
44. Tuomisto, H. et al. 2003. Dispersal, environment, and floristic variation of western Amazonian forests. Science 299: 241-244.
45. Valencia, R. et al. 1998. Diversity and family composition of trees in different regions of Ecuador: a sample of 18 one-ha plots. - In: Dallmeier, F. and Komiskey, J. (eds), Forest biodiversity in North, Central and South America, and the Caribbean: research and monitoring. Man and Biosphere Series 21. Parthenon Publ. Group, pp. 569-584.
46. Vellend, M. et al. 2008. Using subsets of species in biodiversity surveys. J. Appl. Ecol. 45: 161-169.
47. Wiens, J. J. and Graham, C. H. 2005. Niche conservatism: integrating evolution, ecology, and conservation biology. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 36: 519-539.
48. Williams, P. H. 1996. Mapping variations in the strength and breadth of biogeographic transition zones using species turnover. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 263: 579-588.
49. Williams, P. H. et al. 1999. Interpreting biogeographical boundaries among Afrotropical birds: spatial patterns in richness gradients and species replacement. J. Biogeogr. 26: 459-474.
50. Wunsam, S. et al. 2002. Comparing diatom species, genera and size in biomonitoring: a case study from streams in the Laurentians (Québec, Canada). Freshwater Biol. 47: 325-474.