Question: According to Whittaker' s proposal, ecologists have traditionally viewed β-diversity as the ratio between γ-diversity and average α-diversity. More recently, an alternative way of partitioning diversity has been 'rediscovered' for which β-diversity is obtained as the difference between γ-diversity and average α-diversity. This additive way of partitioning diversity has rapidly become a very popular framework for hierarchical diversity decomposition at various spatial scales. The question for this study is: Can we highlight any relation between these two ways of partitioning diversity, or do these methods really capture different facets of spatial turnover in species composition? Methods: First the properties that a diversity measure should possess for enabling additive decomposition into α-, β-, and γ-components are reviewed. Next, attention is drawn to the relationships between additive and multiplicative diversity decomposition. Results: It is shown that the additive model is closely related to its multiplicative counterpart through a simple logarithmic transformation. Conclusions: Contrary to the current assumption, both methods for partitioning diversity are not as different as they appear. Hence, the supposed superiority of additive diversity partition over multiplicative diversity decomposition is largely unjustified.

On hierarchical diversity decomposition / Ricotta, Carlo. - In: JOURNAL OF VEGETATION SCIENCE. - ISSN 1100-9233. - STAMPA. - 16:2(2005), pp. 223-226. [10.1111/j.1654-1103.2005.tb02359.x]

On hierarchical diversity decomposition

RICOTTA, Carlo
2005

Abstract

Question: According to Whittaker' s proposal, ecologists have traditionally viewed β-diversity as the ratio between γ-diversity and average α-diversity. More recently, an alternative way of partitioning diversity has been 'rediscovered' for which β-diversity is obtained as the difference between γ-diversity and average α-diversity. This additive way of partitioning diversity has rapidly become a very popular framework for hierarchical diversity decomposition at various spatial scales. The question for this study is: Can we highlight any relation between these two ways of partitioning diversity, or do these methods really capture different facets of spatial turnover in species composition? Methods: First the properties that a diversity measure should possess for enabling additive decomposition into α-, β-, and γ-components are reviewed. Next, attention is drawn to the relationships between additive and multiplicative diversity decomposition. Results: It is shown that the additive model is closely related to its multiplicative counterpart through a simple logarithmic transformation. Conclusions: Contrary to the current assumption, both methods for partitioning diversity are not as different as they appear. Hence, the supposed superiority of additive diversity partition over multiplicative diversity decomposition is largely unjustified.
2005
equivalent number of species; shannon's entropy; diversity partition; equivalentnumber of species; community similarity; shannon’s entropy
01 Pubblicazione su rivista::01a Articolo in rivista
On hierarchical diversity decomposition / Ricotta, Carlo. - In: JOURNAL OF VEGETATION SCIENCE. - ISSN 1100-9233. - STAMPA. - 16:2(2005), pp. 223-226. [10.1111/j.1654-1103.2005.tb02359.x]
File allegati a questo prodotto
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/131072
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 28
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 25
social impact