Abstract
Analyses of the dependency of species richness (S) on area (A), the so-called species-area relationships (SARs), are widespread approaches to characterize and compare biodiversity patterns. This article highlights – with a focus on small-scale SARs of plants in continuous ecosystems – how inappropriate sampling methods or theoretical misconceptions can create artifacts and thus may lead to wrong conclusions. Most of these problems have been recognized before but continue to appear regularly in the scientific literature. The following main points are reviewed and discussed: i) Species richness values and SARs depend on the measurement method (any-part vs. grid-point system); ii) Species-richness values depend on the shape of the analyzed plots; iii) Many published SARs are not true SARs but instead represent species sampling curves or their data points consist of richness totals for incontiguous subplots; iv) Nested-plot design is the preferred sampling method for SARs (the claim that this approach would cause pseudoreplication is erroneous); v) SARs should be constructed using mean values of several counts for the smaller areas; vi) SAR functions can be fitted and selected both in the S- and the log S-space but this must be done consistently for all compared function types. It turns out that the finding of non-power function SARs in many studies is due to a lack of awareness of one or several of the named points. Thus, power-function SARs are even more widespread than a recent review would suggest. I therefore propose to use the power law as a universal model for all types of SARs but to test whether the slope z varies with spatial scale. Finally, I urge readers to be aware of the many pitfalls in SAR studies, to fully disclose methodology, and to apply a meaningful and consistent terminology, especially by restricting the terms “species-area relationship” and “species density” to situations in which each data point represents a contiguous area.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allers M-A, Dengler J (2007) Small-scale patterns of pant species richness in the central European landscape. Verh Ges Ökol 37:181
Adler PB, White EP, Lauenroth WK, Kaufman DM, Rassweiler A, Rusak JA (2005) Evidence for a general species-time-area relationship. Ecology 86:2032–2039
Barkman JJ (1989) A critical evaluation of minimum area concepts. Vegetatio 85:89–104
Bell G, Lechowicz MJ, Appenzeller A, Chandler M, DeBlois E, Jackson L, Mackenzie B, Preziosi R, Schallenberg M, Tinker N (1993) The spatial structure of the physical environment. Oecologia 96:114–121
Bossuyt B, Hermy M (2004) Species turnover at small scales in dune slack plant communities. Basic Appl Ecol 5:321–329
Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference – A practical information-theoretic approach. Ed. 2, Springer, New York
Chiarucci A, Viciani D, Winter C, Diekmann M (2006) Effects of productivity on species-area curves in herbaceous vegetation: evidence from experimental and observational data. Oikos 115:475–483
Chong GW, Stohlgren TJ (2007) Species-area curves indicate the importance of habitats’ contribution to regional biodiversity. Ecol Indicators 7:387–395
Christensen E (2007) Eine Theorie zur Beziehung zwischen Artenzahl und Flächengröße. Mitt Arbeitsgem Geobot Schleswig-Holstein Hamburg 64:1–296
Condit R, Hubbell SP, Lafrankie JV, Skumar R, Manokaran N, Foster RB, Ashton PS (1996) Species-area and species-individual relationships for tropical trees: a comparison of three 50-ha plots. J Ecol 84:549–562
Connor EF, McCoy ED (1979) The statistics and biology of the species-area relationship. Amer Naturalist 113:791–833
Connor EF, McCoy ED (2001) Species-area relationships. In Levin SA (eds) Encyclopedia of biodiversity 5. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 397–411
Crawley MJ, Harral JE (2001) Scale dependence in plant biodiversity. Science 291:864–868
Cresswell JE, Vidal-Martinez VM (1995) The investigation of saturation in the species richness of communities: some comments on methodology. Oikos 72:301–304
Dengler J (2003) Entwicklung und Bewertung neuer Ansätze in der Pflanzensoziologie unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Vegetationsklassifikation. Arch Naturwiss Diss 14:1–297
Dengler J (2006) Variabilität von Artendichte und Artenzusammensetzung auf unterschiedlichen räumlichen Skalenebenen – Exemplarische Untersuchungen aus Trockenrasen und Konsequenzen für das Probedesign von Biodiversitätsuntersuchungen. In Bültmann H, Fartmann T, Hasse T (eds) Trockenrasen auf unterschiedlichen Betrachtungsebenen – Berichte einer Tagung vom 26.-28. August in Münster, Arbeiten Inst Landschaftsökol Münster 15:73–81
Dengler J (in press) Which function describes the species-area relationship best? A review and empirical evaluation. J Biogeogr
Dengler J, Boch S (2008) Sampling-design effects on properties of species-area relationships – a case study from Estonian dry grassland communities. Folia Geobot 43(3):289–304
Dengler J, Bedall P, Bruchmann I, Hoeft I, Lang A (2004) Artenzahl-Areal-Beziehungen in uckermärkischen Trockenrasen unter Berücksichtigung von Kleinstflächen – eine neue Methode und erste Ergebnisse. Kieler Not Pflanzenk Schleswig-Holstein Hamburg 32:20–25
Désilets P, Houle G (2005) Effects of resource availability and heterogeneity on the slope of the species-area curve along a floodplain-upland gradient. J Veg Sci 16:487–496
Desmet P, Cowling R (2004) Using the species-area relationship to set baseline targets for conservation. Ecol Soc 9(2):1–23 available at: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss2/art11, Article 1
Dierschke H (1994) Pflanzensoziologie – Grundlagen und Methoden. Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart
Dolnik C (2003) Artenzahl-Areal-Beziehungen von Wald- und Offenlandgesellschaften – Ein Beitrag zur Erfassung der botanischen Artenvielfalt unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Flechten und Moose am Beispiel des Nationalparks Kurischen Nehrung (Russland). Mitt Arbeitsgem Geobot Schleswig-Holstein Hamburg 62:1–183
Dolnik C, Breuer M (2008) Scale dependency in the species-area relationship of plant communities. Folia Geobot 43(3):305–318
Drakare S, Lennon JJ, Hillebrand H (2006) The imprint of the geographical, evolutionary and ecological context on species-area relationships. Ecol Lett 9:215–227
Fattorini S (2007) To fit or not to fit? A poorly fitting procedure produces inconsistent results when the species-area relationship is used to locate hotspots. Biodivers & Conservation 16:2531–2538
Flather CH (1996) Fitting species-accumulation functions and assessing regional land use impacts on avian diversity. J Biogeogr 23:155–168
Fridley JD, Peet RK, Wentworth TR, White PS (2005) Connecting fine- and broad-scale species-area relationships of southeastern U. S. flora. Ecology 86:1172–1177
Gitay H, Roxburgh SH, Wilson JB (1991) Species-area relations in a New Zealand tussock grassland, with implications for nature reserve design and for community structure. J Veg Sci 2:113–118
Gleason HA (1922) On the relation between species and area. Ecology 3:158–162
Gotelli NJ, Colwell RK (2001) Quantifying biodiversity: procedures and pitfalls in the measurement and comparison of species richness. Ecol Lett 4:379–391
Gray JS, Ugland KI, Lambshead J (2004a) Species accumulation and species area curves – a comment on Scheiner (2003). Global Ecol Biogeogr 13:469–476
Gray JS, Ugland KI, Lambshead J (2004b) On species accumulation and species-area curves. Global Ecol Biogeogr 13:567–568
Greig-Smith P (1983) Quantitative plant ecology. Ed. 3, Blackwell, Oxford
Harte J, McCarthy S, Taylor K, Kinzig A, Fischer ML (1999) Estimating species-area relationships from plot to landscape scale using species spatial-turnover data. Oikos 86:45–54
He F, Legendre P (1996) On species-area relations. Amer Naturalist 148:719–737
Heegaard E, Økland RH, Bratli H, Dramstad WE, Engan G, Pedersen O, Solstad H (2007) Regularity of species richness relationships to patch size and shape. Ecography 30:589–597
Hill JL, Curran PJ (2003) Area, shape and isolation of tropical forest fragments: effects on tree species diversity and implications for conservation. J Biogeogr 30:1391–1403
Hopkins B (1955) The species-area relation of plant communities. J Ecol 43:409–426
Hui C (2008) On species-area and species accumulation curves: A comment on Chong and Stohlgren’s index. Ecol Indicators 8:327–329
Inouye RS (1998) Species-area curves and estimates of total species richness in an old-field chronosequence. Pl Ecol 137:31–40
Johnson JB, Omland KS (2004) Model selection in ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 19:101–108
Keeley JE, Fotheringham CJ (2005) Plot shape effects on plant species diversity measurements. J Veg Sci 16:249–256
Kilburn PD (1966) Analysis of the species-area relation. Ecology 47:831–843
Knapp R (1984) (ed) Sampling methods and taxon analysis in vegetation science – Relevé surveys, ‘Vegetationsaufnahmen’, floristic analysis of plant communities. Handbook of Vegetation Science 4, W. Junk Publ., The Hague
Kunin WE (1997) Sample shape, spatial scale and species counts: implications for reserve design. Biol Conservation 82:369–377
Löbel S, Dengler J, Hobohm C (2004) Beziehungen zwischen der Artenvielfalt von Gefäßpflanzen, Moosen und Flechten in Trockenrasen der Insel Öland (Schweden). Kieler Not Pflanzenk Schleswig-Holstein Hamburg 32:9–13
Loehle C (1990) Proper statistical treatment of species-area data. Oikos 57:143–145
Lomolino MV (2000) Ecology’s most general, yet protean pattern: the species-area relationship. J Biogeogr 27:17–26
Lomolino MV (2001) The species-area relationship: new challenges for an old pattern. Progr Phys Geogr 25:1–21
Lomolino MV, Weiser MD (2001) Towards a more general species-area relationship: diversity on all islands, great and small. J Biogeogr 28:431–445
McGill B (2003) Strong and weak test of macroecological theory. Oikos 102:678–685
Mueller-Dombois D, Ellenberg H (1974) Aims and methods of vegetation ecology. Wiley, New York
Öster M, Cousins SAO, Eriksson O (2007) Size and heterogeneity rather than landscape context determine plant species richness in semi-natural grasslands. J Veg Sci 18:859–868
Palmer MW (1995) How should one count species? Nat Areas J 15:124–135
Palmer MW, McGlinn DJ, Fridley JD (2008) Artifacts and artifictions in biodiversity research. Folia Geobot 43(3):245–257
Peet RK, Wentworth TR, White PS (1998) A flexible, multipurpose method for recording vegetation composition and structure. Castanea 63:262–274
Plotkin JB, Potts MD, Yu DW, Bunyavejchewin S, Condit R, Foster R, Hubbell SP, LaFrankie J, Manokaran N, Seng LH, Sukumar R, Nowak MA, Ashton PS (2000) Predicting species diversity in tropical forests. Proc Natl Acad USA 97:10850–10854
Quinn GP, Keough MJ (2002) Experimental design and data analysis for biologists. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Rejmánek M, Rosén E (1992) Influence of colonizing shrubs on species-area relationships in alvar plant communities. J Veg Sci 3:625–630
Ricotta C (2007) Random sampling does not exclude spatial dependence: the importance of neutral models for ecological hypothesis testing. Folia Geobot 42:153–160
Rosenzweig ML (1995) Species diversity in space and time. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Sagar R, Raghubanshi AS, Singh JS (2003) Asymptotic models of species-area curve for measuring diversity of dry tropical forest tree species. Curr Sci Assoc 84:1555–1560
Scheiner SM (2003) Six types of species - area curves. Global Ecol Biogeor 12:441–447
Scheiner SM (2004) A mélange of curves - further dialogue about species-area relationships. Global Ecol Biogeogr 13:479–484
Shmida A (1984) Whittaker’s plant diversity sampling method. Israel J Bot 33:41–46
Stiles A, Scheiner SM (2007) Evaluation of species-area functions using Sonoran Desert plant data: not all species-area curves are power functions. Oikos 116:1930–1940
Stohlgren TJ (1995) Planning long-term vegetation studies at landscape scales. In Powell TM, Steele JH (eds) Ecological time series. Chapman & Hall, New York, pp 209–241
Stohlgren TJ (2007) Measuring plant diversity – lessons from the field. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Stohlgren TJ, Falkner MB, Schell LD (1995) A modified-Whittaker nested vegetation sampling method. Vegetatio 117:113–121
Sykes MT, van der Maarel E, Peet RK, Willems J (1994) High species mobility in species-rich plant communities: an intercontinental comparison. Folia Geobot Phytotax 29:439–448
Tittensor DP, Micheli F, Nyström M, Worm B (2007) Human impacts on the species-area relationship in reef fish assemblages. Ecol Lett 10:760–772
Tjørve E (2003) Shapes and functions of species-area curves: a review of possible models. J Biogeogr 30:827–835
Ugland KI, Gray JS, Ellingsen KE (2003) The species-accumulation curve and estimation of species richness. J Anim Ecol 72:888–897
van der Maarel E (1997) Biodiversity: from bable to biosphere management. Special Features in Biosystematics and Biodiversity 2. Opulus Press, Uppsala
Veech JA (2000) Choice of species-area function affects indentification of Hotspots. Conservation Biol 14:140–147
Westhoff V, van der Maarel E (1973) The Braun-Blanquet approach. In Whittaker RH (eds) Ordination and classification of communities. Handbook of Vegetation Science 5. W. Junk Publ., The Hague, pp 617–726
Williams CB (1943) Area and number of species. Nature 152:264–267
Williams MR (1995) An extreme-value function model of the species incidence and species-area relations. Ecology 76:2607–2616
Williams MR (1996) Species-area curves: the need to include zeroes. Global Ecol Biogeogr Lett 5:91–93
Williams JW, ReVelle CS, Levin SA (2005) Spatial attributes and reserve design models: A review. Environm Modelling Assessm 10:163–181
Williamson M (1988) Relationship of species number to area, distance and other variables. In Myers AA, Giller PS (eds) Analytical biogeography: An integrated approach to the study of animal and plant distributions. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 91–115
Williamson M (2003) Species-area relationships at small scales in continuum vegetation. J Ecol 91:904–907
Williamson M, Gaston KJ, Lonsdale WM (2001) The species-area relationship does not have an asymptote!. J Biogeogr 28:827–830
Williamson M, Gaston KJ, Lonsdale WM (2002) An asymptote is an asymptote and not found in species-area relationships. J Biogeogr 29:1713–1713
Wilson JB (2007) Priorities in statistics, the sensitive feet of elephants, and don’t transform data. Folia Geobot 42:161–167
Zonneveld IS (1994) Vicinism and mass effect. J Veg Sci 5:441–444
Acknowledgements
I thank Tomáš Herben for inviting this contribution, three anonymous reviewers as well as Christian Dolnik and the members of the two plant ecological working groups at the University of Hamburg for constructive comments on earlier versions of the manuscript, which led to significant improvements, and Curtis Björk for polishing the English usage. Christian Dolnik kindly provided the richness data used in Fig. 1. Finally, I wish to express my gratitude towards Carsten Hobohm and Erik Christensen, who together with Christian Dolnik have spurred my interest in species-area relationships and with whom I had long and inspiring discussions on many of the topics dealt with in this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dengler, J. Pitfalls in Small-Scale Species-Area Sampling and Analysis. Folia Geobot 43, 269–287 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12224-008-9014-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12224-008-9014-9